Posted on 04/19/2013 9:15:57 AM PDT by servo1969
Dear Friends,
President Obama wanted three things on gun control -- to ban assault weapons, limit magazine sizes, and expand background checks. Fortunately, he lost on all three.
I’ve always been confident if the Senate debated the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment would win.
Yesterday, the Senate took up, debated, and voted on gun violence legislation. I am very pleased we had this debate, and was always ready and willing to vote in support of what I believe.
Here’s how I voted yesterday:
Voted Against the Manchin-Toomey Background Check Amendment (Failed 54-46, required 60 votes)
No matter how well-intentioned, the Manchin-Toomey amendment expanded background checks in an unwise way. The internet provisions would have been burdensome and difficult for citizens to comply with. In addition, it contained provisions making advertising a firearm in a community or church bulletin subject to the same processes as if buying from a licensed dealer.
Introduced and Voted in Support of the Grassley-Cruz-Graham Substitute Amendment (Failed 52-48, required 60 votes)
I was very proud the Grassley-Cruz-Graham amendment received a majority vote. I hope the House of Representatives will take up this bipartisan legislation which focuses on ensuring people like Alice Boland are in the National Instant Criminal Background (NICS) system. The legislation included important provisions for school resource officers. It holds the Department of Justice accountable for the gun laws they have not enforced. It was supported by the National Rifle Association and provided real-world practical solutions to the problem of gun violence. I strongly encourage the U.S. House of Representatives to take up and pass our legislation.
Voted Against the Feinstein Amendment Banning Assault Weapons (Failed 40-60, required 60 votes)
The assault weapons ban didn’t work in the 1990s and it won’t work now. I, along with millions of other Americans, own an AR-15. Only a fraction of the murders committed in the country involve any type of rifle and the Feinstein assault weapons ban does not address the real problems of gun violence.
Voted in Support of the Cornyn National Conceal-Carry Reciprocity Legislation (Failed 57-43, required 60 votes)
I voted for this amendment because it would allow a person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry in other states that do not prohibit concealed carry.
Voted Against the Lautenberg-Blumenthal Amendment Limiting Magazine Size (Failed 46-54, required 60 votes)
One bullet in the hands of a homicidal maniac is one too many. But in the case of a young mother defending her children against a home invader -- a real-life event which recently occurred near Atlanta -- six bullets may not be enough. Criminals aren’t going to follow legislation limiting magazine capacity. However, a limit could put law-abiding citizens at a distinct disadvantage when confronting a criminal.
Yesterday, we saw that President Obama's politically-driven solutions to gun violence could not withstand scrutiny from Congress and the American people. Substance won out over the unsound solutions President Obama and others were pushing.
Sincerely,
Lindsey O. Graham
United States Senator
Next week he'd vote for Feinstein's bill
Sincerely,
Fellow citizen
Yepper, 100% correct.
He did vote for an “amendment” on the background checks issue.
I don’t understand what they are trying to change about recirpocity. The States already work that out among themselves.
Hah! My thoughts exactly. How many times do our esteemed Senators have to play this game? Govern as a big Government loving liberal for the first 4 1/2 years, and than tack right the last year and a half to appease the constituents. Rinse and repeat.
I aggravated the hell out of him. I’ve been filling up his inbox all hours of the day for weeks.
One hopes.
If not, the search should begin at once.
We simply can't afford to lose a senate seat to the likes of another Akin creep.
.
Finally did something right.
He needs to pick up in other areas, like immigration.
No you don’t. That is another example of a list the government would love to be in charge of.
The “People” should not allow their federal govenrment to get in on something they and their State have been reponsible for, and so far have done a darn good job of keeping within their state as far as who gets access to the list.
Wouldn’t you love to have your government in charge of your right to carry?
They can’t even be trusted with the Bill of Rights.
If you haven’t noticed they want as many “lists” of the American people as they can get you and your state to put you on and then be responsible enough to give it to the Federal governement.
All in the name of common sense and individual responsibilty
Should be exactly like driving licenses, what do you not understand about that? Today you can drive in any state with a valid driving license issued by any other state. Currently you can have a CCW from say Oregon and drive into California, you are subject to immediate arrest.
D@mn straight why would you want Akin when you can have this?
He followed the McCain media spotlight like a frog to the gig.
I think you answered my question...."Just like Driver's licenses."
I'd be great with that. Mine is issued in Indiana and is no good in OH and IL, which is often problematic. I doubt politicians could get a law like that passed that would require interstate reciprocity regardless of individual state laws. But I would love to see it.
what the federal govt giveth, it can take away. I think it is up to the states to work out an agreement................
Thanks.
.
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.