Posted on 04/12/2013 10:30:14 AM PDT by backpacker_c
While most in the media have harped the bipartisan compromise concerning universal background checks by manchin and toomey, little notice has been given to the fact that feinstein has reintroduced her assault weapon ban as amendments to the manchin/toomey bill.
To see the amendments, go to thomas.loc.gov at the url posted. Then go to 'amendments'. Next, click on each amendment (e.g.711), then 'text of amendment as submitted' to see text of the amendment.
Mostly Collaborating. They see a lot of reward by being king, well until the whole thing crumbles which is what the left wants, and who do you think they will trod out against the wall for taking the blame?
That is if there will be anybody left who can read and write about it. The rate we are going will be like those ancient ruins that we see from humanities past where we know virtually nothing about them.
According to NewsMax.com:
“Obama-backed Gun Control Bill Unlikely to Pass
Friday, 12 Apr 2013 09:08 AM
President Barack Obama’s bid to enact even a scaled-back version of his gun-safety agenda needs support from many of the 16 Senate Republicans who showed they’re at least willing to debate it.
He also must hold onto almost all of the 52 Democrats and independents who joined yesterday’s 68-31 vote to advance the measure for debate.
The White House already may be losing Democratic Senator Max Baucus, who voted yes for debate though said in an interview later that he has trouble with the legislation.
“I oppose the bill, I just cannot support it,” said Baucus of Montana, who faces re-election in 2014. “I’m just not going to block debate on it.”
Several Republicans said they voted yes for the same reason — to allow the measure to advance — though they probably won’t back it in a final vote.
“It’s a debate we ought to have,” said Republican Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia. “I don’t think I am going to support the legislation.”
The Senate agreed yesterday to move to debate on the legislation, S. 649, which would expand background checks of gun purchasers, increase funding for school safety and set new penalties for gun trafficking.
The bill, should it clear the Senate, faces an uncertain fate in the House, where Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, said he won’t make a “blanket” commitment to bring a gun measure to the floor.
Sandy Hook
The debate over gun control was reignited by the Dec. 14 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Adam Lanza used a Bushmaster AR-15 semiautomatic rifle to kill 20 children and six school employees. Just weeks later, Obama proposed a package of measures to curb gun violence that included renewing a ban on assault weapons and setting size limits for ammunition magazines.
Those proposals were dropped from the Senate bill amid opposition from the National Rifle Association. The president campaigned this week to preserve momentum for what’s left of the measure, bringing families of Newtown victims to Washington on Air Force One to ask senators to support it.
Baucus was one of the Democrats who met with Newtown victims’ relatives. He called it a “heart wrenching and emotional meeting” that, nevertheless, didn’t change his position on the legislation.
Begich, Pryor
Senator Mark Begich of Alaska, who said he met twice with the Newtown families, voted yesterday to block consideration of the measure.
“The base bill, I still had problems with it,” Begich said.
Democratic Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas also voted against moving forward with the bill.
Begich and Pryor — the only 2 Democrats to oppose bringing the measure up for debate — are up for re-election next year.
The 16 Republican votes to advance the bill signaled that at least some in the party will support the legislation. Still, one of those Republicans, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, said he won’t back the measure.
A number of Republicans think that voting to allow debate “gives them the freedom to vote against the bill,” said Stu Rothenberg, editor of the nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report in Washington.
“I think it’s at the least embarrassing, and more than that, a bit of a problem, that Democrats can’t get every Democrat,” Rothenberg said. “It becomes easier for Republicans to just to say ‘look at Pryor or Begich.’”
Democrat Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who is up for re- election next year in a state that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney won in November, wouldn’t say whether she supports the legislation.
Second Amendment
“I am going to be a strong supporter of the Second Amendment,” Landrieu said. The constitutional amendment protects Americans’ right to bear arms.
The political concerns of these Democrats are weighing on party members heading into next week’s vote.
“This is that big issue that the nation faces that you need to stand up and vote on,” said California Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat who unsuccessfully sought to include an assault-weapon ban in the legislation. “It always surprises me when some people, the first thing they think of is getting re- elected.”
Democratic defections may extend beyond those facing re- election. Senator Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, a freshman lawmaker, said she hasn’t “formed any opinions” on the background-check compromise.
‘Way of Life’
North Dakota has a strong gun culture, Heitkamp said. “You need to understand in our part of the country, this isn’t an issue, this is a way of life, this is how people feel,” she said.
Yesterday’s bipartisan vote followed a compromise by Republican Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a Democrat, to require background checks for gun sales over the Internet and between private parties at gun shows.
Mandatory background checks for most gun purchasers are supported by 91 percent of U.S. voters, including 96 percent of Democrats, 88 percent of Republicans and 88 percent of gun- owning households, according to a Quinnipiac University poll conducted March 27-April 1.
The Manchin-Toomey proposal will be offered as the first amendment to the Senate bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said debate and votes may stretch into the week of April 22.
The push for legislation by the Newtown families and other groups supporting it has been an offsetting force to the influence of the NRA, the nation’s biggest gun lobby.
A-Minus Rating
Nine of the Republicans voting to move to debate on the bill received at least an A-minus rating from Gun Owners of America, a gun-rights group based in Springfield, Virginia.
“The political landscape in America on gun safety is changing before our eyes,” said Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat. “Four months ago gun safety and gun violence were thought to be politically untouchable in America.”
Republicans including John McCain of Arizona will be crucial to the success of the legislation. In an interview yesterday, he stopped short of endorsing the legislation.
“I’m certainly favorably disposed but I’ve got to look at all the details,” he said. “The Internet aspect of the issue is something I have concerns about.”
Another Republican being pressed on the issue is Susan Collins of Maine, who is sponsoring a separate bill to set penalties for firearms trafficking. She said the compromise between Manchin and Toomey addressed many of her concerns about the legislation.
“It takes care of many of the problems that are in the underlying bill,” she said. “It’s certainly a positive development.”
Democratic Senator Charles Schumer of New York predicted a challenge to gain votes in the coming days.
“Make no mistake about it; we have a tough fight” to pass the gun measure, Schumer said. “The NRA will try and throw all kinds of amendments at us.”
Nothing they decide or do makes any difference here at my house. Here we follow the Bill of Rights and let the silly politicians pretend they are making a difference. Someday they will shoot me dead, and God will sort it all out, but someday I will die anyway. I’d rather do it standing for what’s right than waste away to cancer or alzheimers. The Second Amendment lives in the hearts of patriots.
In any scenario I think that the forces of evil will be defeated...(Dems lose)
Surely among the Conservative winners someone will be able to read/write! lolol
It’s coming....hope I live long enough to see it too....
Well put ez..!!! Thank you..!!
You nailed it! Bravo.
Before some slimy politician gives you what you stupidly ask for, think about this.
How many of those failed back ground checks were denied because of mistakes due to incorrect information?
How many were denied because of the ex-post facto laughtenburg amendment that people didn't know they were subject to.
Did you know that in Pennsylvania before 1977 if you were convicted of shop lifting, drunk driving or reckless driving like drag racing or peeling out, you are denied gun ownership? All three of these small crimes, usually committed by teenagers, carried sentences of up to three years. There are probably a lot of other states that had the same laws and penalties.
So now you want to bring federal prosecution down on everyone that tries to purchase a firearm, even though they might not even know that they are prohibited?
Do some research before you spout off.
Reread what I posted.
You want the feds to prosecute everyone that tries to buy a weapon and is refused.
I explained to you why you are wrong in your thinking.
If you want to stop "GUN VIOLENCE", stop plea bargaining crimes down.
We have a law in Pennsylvania that was pushed and passed by our Governor Thornburg in the 80's that proscribed that if you commit a crime with a gun you were to serve five years in prison. This sentence was to be served NON-CONCURRENT.
In other words, if you committed a robbery with a fire arm and were sentenced to ten years in prison, you got an extra five years tacked on after your original sentence was served.
This actually worked to reduce crimes with guns.
But it didn't take long for filthy democrat DA's in big city democrat strongholds to allow this proscription to be the first thing to be plea bargained away. So now there is no deterrent to committing a crime with a gun.
We now have a rash of Pittsburgh police that have been shot by criminals that should have been serving time and not allowed to be set free on our streets.
Enforce the laws that we already have. They are more than adequate to stop criminals if enforced.
You didn’t read it very well or you have low comprehension. The entire point of my post isn’t to prosecute every NICS rejection. Most are likely in error.
My post proves that the existing law isn’t being enforce. It is easy to enforce and there is an ton of evidence against a felon who goes through the NICS: they are videod, there is a live human witness (the gun shop owner/clerk), they use an ID, they fill out and sign the paperwork and lying on it is a felony in and of itself.
Why don’t these NICS rejections get prosecuted?
Reread it a third time and you’ll see we’re in agreement. You’re misreading what I wrote.
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.