Posted on 07/23/2009 8:27:24 AM PDT by Sasparilla
In a loss by just 2 votes, concealed handgun permit holders were denied the first step in handgun carry permit national reciprocity. The final vote was 58 to 39 with 60 votes needed to pass the Thune amendment.
As Charles Schumer smirked his way through an argument against our Second Amendment freedoms, it was a bizarre liberal two faced championing of "state's rights" political expediency.
Will there be the same liberal clamoring for state's rights when someone in Montana, who is squeaky clean, sends a letter to BATFE telling them that they intend to comply with Montana state law and make guns and sound suppressors with the words "made in Montana" on them that are immune to Federal regulation. Let's just see what Mr. Schumer has to say about that.
Former Gun Freedom advocate, and the new New York Senator, Kristen Gillibrand, was whipped into line by Schumer, just as he promised he would do, as she spoke out against the gun rights Amendment.
Dianne Feinstein gleefully pointed out the aberational killings of over twenty people this year by 3 permit holders, and extended their murderous intent and ideations to all permit holders by implication. she also said that passage would be an opportunity to bring 50 handguns guns into California in a back pack and sell them at once. That's as if this isn't already illegal to do without a FFL and a place of business.
This, coming in the face of Senator Thune's pointing out to the Senators that permit holders were over 180 times less likely to commit a violent gun crime than those who have not undergone the permitting process. But, why should a liberal pay attention to facts when a discussion can be charged with usual liberal emotion.
She also almost hysterically proclaimed that the...
(Excerpt) Read more at secondamendmentfreedom.blogspot.com ...
So close!
Two. ...the precise number of Republicans who voted against it -- Voinovich and Lugar.
The author gets it:
“Just as the anti gun lunatics will not give up in their quest to disarm the average American, those of us who believe in the sanctity of the Second Amendment must remain on the offensive in protecting our rights. “
Dems play games like that. Making votes close so that some vulnerable Dems can vote with their constituents instead of with the party.
I pray it will never get this far, but if they want to come claim my gun they are welcome to try in person.
So close!
So they would have us believe. However, several senators, after learning the bill would not pass, changed their vote to YEA so they could be on record as being for the bill.
Whores, all of them.
See post 7
The Thune Amendment was a great idea. Allow people who went through the pains and requirements to obtain a permit would be able (if the amendment remained intact after conference) to carry concealed in any state that has a legal CCW permit law.
Great!!! Right?
Now the drawback, and one that NO ONE is looking at is future ramifications.
Say this did pass and finally became law. Now some quick thinking anti-gun politician can say...."There is too much disparity in the laws of the states to make this really work, maybe we should write our own guidelines for CCW permits. That way we can obtain the state records to see who has permits and if they can meet OUR stringent requirements. Maybe we should know what type of firearms they carry and require a casing from them."
While the Thune Amendment would have been a nice thing to have, it was fraught with unintended consequences. A government that wants to 'help' you, usually just wants control over you.
Let’s see, 3 permit holders commited a crime, so ALL permit holders are potential criminals. Yet 19 arab muslims pull off 9/11, but we shouldn’t judge them by that action? Wouldn’t it be funny/ironic if she has a permit in Californistan? Oh wait, she already has security provided by my tax dollars.
That’s ok, when the SHTF, those pansies are going to be reduced to crying, sniveling sacks of $hit... and hopefully either be shot or hung as traitors or spat upon and viewed with justly deserved disgust for the rest of their pathetic and miserable lives.
This was one of my concerns as well!
I will stick to the Constitution and what it says.
Doesn’t the word “permit” bother people that defend the right to bear arms?
Do you need a “permit” to vote?
Do you need a “permit” to voice your opinion?
When is a “permit” needed to exercise the right to bear arms good?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.