• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Joe Manchin says on verge of gun deal

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Sen. Joe Manchin says he is on the verge of a bipartisan deal to expand background checks for gun sales, an agreement that could lead to the biggest change in U.S. gun laws in nearly 20 years.
Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat, has been meeting with conservative GOP Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania over the past week to try to forge a deal on background checks.


Following a briefing with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Manchin told reporters the two sides were very close to an agreement.

“We’re getting there. We’re really getting there,” Manchin said. “Tomorrow we hope to be at the point where we can finalize everything.”



Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/harry-reid-joe-manchin-pat-toomey-89806.html#ixzz2Q1zLs09

I can agree with this. Universal Background checks seems like common sense and a good step forward for this country.

 
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/harry-reid-joe-manchin-pat-toomey-89806.html#ixzz2Q1zLs09

I can agree with this. Universal Background checks seems like common sense and a good step forward for this country.

[/FONT][/COLOR]
What's in the deal for pro-gun? What are we getting that we didn't have before? Anti-gun gets background checks, and pro-gun gets... assault rifles?....national reciprocity for CCW permits?....elimination of some gun-free zones?....silencers without any paperwork? What?
 
What's in the deal for pro-gun? What are we getting that we didn't have before? Anti-gun gets background checks, and pro-gun gets... assault rifles?....national reciprocity for CCW permits?....elimination of some gun-free zones? What?

I guess you get to keep your guns, no magazine limit, no assault weapons ban. IMO seems to be a big win for the right.
 
I guess you get to keep your guns, no magazine limit, no assault weapons ban. IMO seems to be a big win for the right.
2 men, Mike and Bob, brake into your home. Mike wants to rape you orally and Bob wants to empty your safe. Oral rape takes to long and the safe will take a while to crack, so Mike and Bob negotiate and compromise. Mike will rape you vaginally which will take less time, and Bob will only grab what's in plane sight because it's easier.

You see their agreement to rape you and steel your open property as a good bi-partisan compromise.

******
Since only anti-gun gets anything, this deal is not bipartisan, it's just partisan.
 
2 men, Mike and Bob, brake into your home. Mike wants to rape you orally and Bob wants to empty your safe. Oral rape takes to long and the safe will take a while to crack, so Mike and Bob negotiate and compromise. Mike will rape you vaginally which will take less time, and Bob will only grab what's in plane sight because it's easier.

You see their agreement to rape you and steel your open property as a good bi-partisan compromise.

:shock:
I dont want to be raped!
 
2 men, Mike and Bob, brake into your home. Mike wants to rape you orally and Bob wants to empty your safe. Oral rape takes to long and the safe will take a while to crack, so Mike and Bob negotiate and compromise. Mike will rape you vaginally which will take less time, and Bob will only grab what's in plane sight because it's easier.

You see their agreement to rape you and steel your open property as a good bi-partisan compromise.

******
Since only anti-gun gets anything, this deal is not bipartisan, it's just partisan.

Interesting metaphor; interesting logic. I know we have lost sight of what our legislature is all about. The primary purpose of government is to make laws that solve societal problems. Not everything is a compromise.
 
Interesting metaphor; interesting logic. I know we have lost sight of what our legislature is all about. The primary purpose of government is to make laws that solve societal problems. Not everything is a compromise.
How would universal background checks have prevented the Sandy Hook shooting?
 
How would universal background checks have prevented the Sandy Hook shooting?

Its not just about Sandy Hook its about gun violence in general and this.
Gun Show: Undercover - YouTube

And stopping felons and people mentally unstable from getting guns, and making it tougher for them to acquire guns.
 
Its not just about Sandy Hook...
I know, it's just that Sandy Hook is at the forfront because Obama is still in front of the media saying "shame on us if we forgot" referring to Sandy Hook and why we should pass these bills. So that's why I ask, and I would appreciate an answer. How would universal background checks have prevented Sandy Hook?

How would universal background checks have prevented the CO theater shooting?

How would universal background checks have prevented the OR mall shooting?

How does it stop someone who already owns a gun? How does it stop someone with a criminal mind who can pass NICS?

....its about gun violence in general...
Keep in mind that we do want some level of gun-violence, like a woman defending against a rapist. The term "gun violence" is misleading.


That's just good undercover work. I hope all the offenders are charged accordingly. That video doesn't justify more laws, though.

And stopping felons and people mentally unstable from getting guns, and making it tougher for them to acquire guns.
Walk me though it, if you would. I'm genuinely interested in how you understand this will work.

Let's say I have a gun to sell to a friend. He and I agree on a price, and it's time to make the transaction. What happens?

The way it works right now in SD is: He gives me cash, I give him the gun, and that's it. How would this new law stop that kind of transaction?
 
Last edited:
Will this bill ever make it to the floor for a vote though?

They are supposed to have a vote on Thursday on whether to bring it to the floor.

Threat to Block Debate on Guns Appears to Fade in Senate

"Several Senate Republicans said Tuesday that they would not participate in a filibuster of the first major gun control bill since 1993, as Democrats appeared on the verge of overcoming a blockade threatened by a group of conservatives before a word of debate on the measure was uttered.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, said he would schedule an initial showdown vote for Thursday. If backers of the measure can corral at least 60 votes, the Senate will begin consideration of a series of gun safety proposals — strongly supported by President Obama — that would still face a long and difficult journey across the Senate floor.

The bill, which would increase penalties for illegal gun purchase and greatly expand background checks on gun buyers, would again need 60 votes to end the ensuing debate after consideration of contentious amendments, including a renewal of the assault weapons ban. Should it cross that very high hurdle, 51 votes would be needed to get to final passage. Even with Democrats controlling 55 seats, no majority was assured given the resistance of some Democrats from more conservative states who face re-election campaigns next year.

Even as Mr. Reid scheduled a vote, Senators Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, and Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania were very near a deal that would most likely serve as an amendment replacing the background check piece of the measure that Mr. Reid is seeking a vote on. Their measure, which would almost certainly appeal to a broader base of members than the one now at the heart of the debate, would include fewer gun buyers in newly expanded checks, but allow for the record keeping that many Republicans have opposed. The two were expected to announce a deal Wednesday. Mr. Manchin briefed Mr. Reid late Tuesday.

Still, eking out the first 60 votes would represent momentum for the bill’s supporters in the Senate, and an egg-on-the-face moment for those Republican senators, led by some younger conservatives, who chose to highlight their efforts to kill the bill before debate, a procedural move usually done more stealthily."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/10/us/politics/more-senate-republicans-oppose-filibuster-on-gun-bill.html?_r=0
 
I know, it's just that Sandy Hook is at the forfront because Obama is still in front of the media saying "shame on us if we forgot" referring to Sandy Hook and why we should pass these bills. So that's why I ask, and I would appreciate an answer. How would universal background checks have prevented Sandy Hook?
It wouldnt have since Lanza's mother bought the guns.


How would universal background checks have prevented the CO theater shooting?
Well saying Holmes was reported to police from Dr. Fenton that he was a threat to the public and mentally unstable it could of been stopped through a background check.

How would universal background checks have prevented the OR mall shooting?
Well saying the weapon was stolen it wouldnt

How does it stop someone who already owns a gun?
It wouldnt


Keep in mind that we do want some level of gun-violence, like a woman defending against a rapist. The term "gun violence" is misleading.
I agree gun violence can be seen as a "positive" thing in self defense. But i dont want to get into an argument about semantics.


That's just good undercover work. I hope all the offenders are charged accordingly.
All of that is legal.

That video doesn't justify more laws, though.
Why not? Why wouldnt a background checks be justified?


Walk me though it, if you would. I'm genuinely interested in how you understand this will work.

Let's say I have a gun to sell to a friend. He and I agree on a price, and it's time to make the transaction. What happens?

The way it works right now in SD is: He gives me cash, I give him the gun, and that's it. How would this new law stop that kind of transaction?

It wouldt.
 
Why not? Why wouldn't a background checks be justified?
Once the buyer says, in any way, that they wouldn't pass an NICS, from that moment on it's a felony to sell to them. At 2:14 in your YouTube video, the vendor who said "I don't care" crossed the line and became a criminal.

You were not showing a video of accepted practice, you showed a video of private sellers braking existing law.
 
Last edited:
Once the buyer says, in any way, that they wouldn't pass an NICS, from that moment on it's a felony to sell to them.

You were not showing a video of accepted practice, you showed a video of private sellers braking existing law.

No it is not. Its legal its called the gun show loophole.
 
No it is not. Its legal its called the gun show loophole.
It is illegal and your own video even says it's illegal:

9.jpg

No one, not you or me or anyone at a gun show, is allowed to knowingly sell to criminals. The undercover investigator said "I probably couldn't pass [NICS] anyway..." and the vendor responds with "I don't car". That vendor was braking existing law. Additionally, the vendor then says "I wouldn't pass it either, bud". So here you have a vendor who couldn't pass NICS selling guns to a customer who says he couldn't pass NICS.

The answer is to make an example out of people who knowingly sell to criminals.
 
Last edited:
It is illegal and your own video even says it's illegal:

View attachment 67145856


No one, not you or me or anyone at a gun show, is allowed to knowingly sell to criminals. The undercover investigator said "I probably couldn't pass [NICS] anyway..." and the vendor responds with "I don't car". That vendor was braking existing law.
"Subsequent news analysis indicated that individuals could not actually buy a fully automatic firearm at gun shows without lengthy background checks and approvals, although purchases of non-automatic firearms are legal in most jurisdictions without a criminal background check, if purchased from a private seller who is not in the business of regularly selling firearms"
Gun shows in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Depends on the jurisdiction
 
It is illegal and your own video even says it's illegal:

View attachment 67145856

No one, not you or me or anyone at a gun show, is allowed to knowingly sell to criminals.

So it is illegal to sell a gun to someone you THINK is a felon. Is that a joke law? How do you prove what someone is thinking? It is certainly totally unenforceable . Undoubtably that was the aim of who ever wrote it.
It is just like the strawman purchase laws in Arizona.... there you must sign a paper saying the purchase is for you... only it's legal to change your mind as you walk out the door and sell it to whomever you want in the parking lot of the gun store. As long as you don't THINK he is a felon of course.
Now I see why you all say we don't enforce the laws we have now. It's a joke on the rest of us. They are unenforceable and specifically written that way. LOL
 
Last edited:
"Subsequent news analysis indicated that individuals could not actually buy a fully automatic firearm at gun shows without lengthy background checks and approvals, although purchases of non-automatic firearms are legal in most jurisdictions without a criminal background check, if purchased from a private seller who is not in the business of regularly selling firearms"
Gun shows in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Depends on the jurisdiction
We're not talking about fully automatic firearms because those have been banned since 1987 with the Hughes Amendment. There's a mountain of paperwork involved in buying a full-auto firearm, and even then you cannot buy a full-auto made after 1987. Full-autos cost upwards of $20,000, require a Class-3 FFL with the $200 tax stamp, FBI finger prints, and the signature of your local Sheriff. You cannot buy full-auto firearms at gun shows.

Basic Guidelines

No one is going into a gun show and walking out with a machine gun with no questions asked. Even if a Class-3 vendor were showing full-auto weapons for sale, the transaction itself literally take between 6 to 18 months to complete before the buyer can take possession of the gun.
 
Last edited:
We're not talking about fully automatic firearms because those have been banned since 1987 with the Hughes Amendment. There's a mountain of paperwork involved in buying a full-auto firearm, and even then you cannot buy a full-auto made after 1987. Full-autos cost upwards of $20,000, require a Class-3 FFL with the $200 tax stamp, FBI finger prints, and the signature of your local Sheriff. You cannot buy full-auto firearms at gun shows.

Basic Guidelines

Keep on reading: "although purchases of non-automatic firearms are legal in most jurisdictions without a criminal background check, if purchased from a private seller who is not in the business of regularly selling firearms"
 
Back
Top Bottom