Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

C-Span Alert (Debate begins this morning @ 9:30am on S. 1805 & Assasult Weapons Ban Renewal)

Posted on 02/25/2004 4:47:28 AM PST by conservativefromGa

Senate debate on the gun manufactures liability bill will begin at 9:30 this morning on C-Span2. Expect Feinstein to attach her Assault Weapons Ban renewal rider on it. Also McCain may attach a rider closing the so called "gun show loophole". This is it folks.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: awb; bang; banglist; sausage; senate; senatelive; sunset
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 681-700701-720721-740 ... 921-923 next last
To: Dead Corpse
Back up in this thread. I was watching CSPAN-2 via the web when Boxer was touting her noxious peice of legislation.

So let me get this straight. You can't be sure what's in the amendment but you're willing to trust that Barbara Boxer accurately portrayed the content of her amendment? And you so trust Barbara Boxer, that you're willing to condemn Republicans and the Republican party because some of them voted for an amendment for which none of us have the text to?

I've also pointed out several times that we shall see exactly how bad it is when the text gets posted to thomas.loc.gov tomorrow.

But that's not stopping you from insulting Republicans and the Republican party TODAY, is it?

Keep your damn insults to yourself.

Physician, heal thyself.

Or are you trying to cover the asses of the twenty some Republicans that voted for it by trying to minimize yet another infringement on commerce and firearms both?

I'd like to read the amendment before passing judgement, unlike you.

701 posted on 02/26/2004 12:47:42 PM PST by Monitor (Gun control isn't about guns; it's about control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 696 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
We were discussing the mentioned particulars back around post 455 or so.

Thanks for the updates. I've having to make spot checks so I missed that.

I really hope the Pubs know what they're doing here. (Why does that sound like the hammer coming back during Russian Roulette?)

702 posted on 02/26/2004 12:49:54 PM PST by LTCJ (Gridlock '05 - the Lesser of Three Evils.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 699 | View Replies]

To: Sender
You talk the talk, but if not Bush, and not the dems, then who exactly do you think is electable outside this subset? Would you do the Nader thing and vote idealistically, thus handing the election to the dems?

1. Maybe the fear that gunowners will stay home in large numbers on Election Day will cause the Republicans to rethink their leftward lurch.

2. Maybe split government isn't so bad. Under Clinton, government was largely paralyzed, leading to smaller increases in spending and a better economy as a result.

3. If the Dems are openly against gun owners while the Republicans are only against us behind closed doors, WTF is the difference who gets elected? The only substantive difference is that the Dems will step over the line sooner and in a bigger way, unleashing a disaster - but either way it is coming.

Again, if you cannot credibly threaten to bolt from a political party, you become its slave. If you need an example, take a look at how the Dems treat the Blacks. They get little or none of their agenda through, since the Dems know that they won't go anywhere else no matter what the Dems do or fail to do; this gives the Dems a chance to "broaden the base" by appealing to other groups opposed to the Blacks, thereby screwing the Blacks in the process.

You are among those taken for granted by the Republicans. You said yourself that they could do anything and you'd still vote for them. Would you vote for them if they pushed for an outright ban on guns? If not, then WHERE, EXACTLY, do you draw the line? And if you have a "line," then the only difference between you and I is one of degree.

703 posted on 02/26/2004 12:50:16 PM PST by Ancesthntr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 698 | View Replies]

To: Monitor
"You can't be sure what's in the amendment but you're willing to trust that Barbara Boxer accurately portrayed the content of her amendment? And you so trust Barbara Boxer, that you're willing to condemn Republicans and the Republican party because some of them voted for an amendment for which none of us have the text to?"

Let me guess, you are willing to believe her website. So you are for the amendment based on her site? I would condemn them for going along irregardless.

"But that's not stopping you from insulting Republicans and the Republican party TODAY, is it? "

Again, I would condemn them for going along irregardless.

"I'd like to read the amendment before passing judgement, unlike you."

And again, I would condemn them for going along irregardless. Why, because the bill should go to the President without ANY amendments. All amendments should not be voted for plain and simple.
704 posted on 02/26/2004 12:55:22 PM PST by looscnnn (Tell me something, it's still "We the people", right? -- Megadeth (Peace Sells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 701 | View Replies]

To: Monitor
This is what I found on packing.org regarding this amendment:
This only requires that a lock be included in all new gun purchases, something the manufacturers are already doing, and a lot cheaper "insurance" than continuing to fight the lawsuits. This is a "no-cost" amendment.

guys!!!, guys !!! I looked at Packing.org and it looks like that was just an intial discussion post. Further down they are quoting FR about the storage angle..I think we are going to have to wait for the text to come out,,,
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best
Please let us know if you have anything else..thanks

705 posted on 02/26/2004 12:55:56 PM PST by kt56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 695 | View Replies]

To: Monitor
So you approve of the Boxer amendment? You approve of the Republicans voting FOR a Democrat Senators addition of a gun lock provision to the legislation?

Are you sure you are on teh right website? Or are you now trusting that Boxer, one of the worst gun grabbers in teh Senate, has suddenly changed her stripes?

Even if this were only a point of sale provision for gun locks, which is only the lesser part of this, it would be quite bad enough.

706 posted on 02/26/2004 12:56:55 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 701 | View Replies]

To: Ancesthntr
Well said!
707 posted on 02/26/2004 12:58:01 PM PST by looscnnn (Tell me something, it's still "We the people", right? -- Megadeth (Peace Sells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 703 | View Replies]

To: Sender
Would you do the Nader thing and vote idealistically, thus handing the election to the dems?

I forgot to answer this question. Here it is: I'm not so much "up in arms" about the lawsuit protection issue - I am disgusted by the present state of affairs and the obvious attempt to make gun ownership so expensive that most people won't pay the price - but it alone isn't make or break for me.

What IS make or break is the AWB. If that egregriously unconstitutional POS is renewed and/or expanded in any way, it will be because Bush allowed it to be, aided & abetted by the Republican majority in both Houses. If I wake up on 9/14/04 and can't legally buy what I was able to on 9/12/1994, then Bush & Co. can kiss my vote goodbye. I will probably forget to go to the polls, and be busy reloading while watching the results.

708 posted on 02/26/2004 1:00:43 PM PST by Ancesthntr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 703 | View Replies]

To: kt56
I looked at Packing.org and it looks like that was just an intial discussion post. Further down they are quoting FR about the storage angle.

And if it comes out that the "FR position" as to Federal penalties relating to possesion were wrong, FR's credibility takes a hit.

That's a shame.

709 posted on 02/26/2004 1:00:56 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 705 | View Replies]

To: looscnnn
Let me guess, you are willing to believe her website.

I'm willing to wait until I've finished reading the text of the amendment before passing judgement.

710 posted on 02/26/2004 1:05:17 PM PST by Monitor (Gun control isn't about guns; it's about control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 704 | View Replies]

To: Ancesthntr
I am not afraid to bolt from the pubbies at all, but where will I go? At some point they will cross the line and I'll bolt along with the others...and we'll have Prezidint Kerry while we all agree how pi**ed off and disappointed we are.

I mean, I can threaten to stay home on election day, we all will threaten it, and the dems won't stay home because they're motivated by burning Bush hatred. We'll get our revenge against the RINOs and the dems will get their revenge against us!

711 posted on 02/26/2004 1:05:47 PM PST by Sender ("This is the most important election in the history of the world." -DU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 703 | View Replies]

To: Sender
It is a Lose Lose situation
712 posted on 02/26/2004 1:08:05 PM PST by Rams82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: Sender
No need to bolt the Republican party. After the Gulf War, I gave up on the LP due to their pacifist response. Check out Ron Pauls Republican Liberty Caucus. Because of the religion issue, I could never vote for a Constitution party candidate. As a political force, they are even more of a "1%" group than the Libertarians are.

The RLC is working to haul the GOP back to the conservative side of things before they completely morph 1960's era Democrats.

713 posted on 02/26/2004 1:10:03 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
So you approve of the Boxer amendment?

I don't know, because I haven't read it yet.

You approve of the Republicans voting FOR a Democrat Senators addition of a gun lock provision to the legislation?

That would depend on the legislation. Every new-in-box pistol I have purchased from a dealer, and every new-in-box pistol a friend of mine has purchased from a dealer have included trigger locks. If that's all this Boxer amendment legislates, then it's a painless and cost-less amendment, and not worthy of the sky-is-falling, all Republicans are Leftist tools rhetoric that's been in ample evidence in this thread.

But I'm willing to wait to read the legislation before passing judgement, again, unlike you.

714 posted on 02/26/2004 1:12:15 PM PST by Monitor (Gun control isn't about guns; it's about control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 706 | View Replies]

To: Sender
I am not afraid to bolt from the pubbies at all, but where will I go?

How about hunting? How about going home and relaxing with your family? Just don't vote.

I mean, I can threaten to stay home on election day, we all will threaten it, and the dems won't stay home because they're motivated by burning Bush hatred. We'll get our revenge against the RINOs and the dems will get their revenge against us!

The Dems might get the Presidency and even control over one House, but not enough control to do that much damage. Not, that is, if the Republicans learn the lesson of their loss and return to being conservative and defending their core constituencies. And they will have to be, since solidifying their base will be essential to recovering the power that they will have given away by allowing the AWB to be renewed or expanded.

I will repeat: when a political party ceases to represent your interests, it must be punished in some way. Otherwise, you are merely its slave. How is a party, or even an individual candidate, supposed to understand that it/he/she has made a mistake that must be corrected in the future if it/he/she is to trusted with power again?

715 posted on 02/26/2004 1:15:54 PM PST by Ancesthntr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Are they voting yet?
716 posted on 02/26/2004 1:21:58 PM PST by looscnnn (Tell me something, it's still "We the people", right? -- Megadeth (Peace Sells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 713 | View Replies]

To: looscnnn
Yep. This is on the Unemployment Amendment and a voting amendment. They just called Rockafeller who voted "Aye".
717 posted on 02/26/2004 1:24:36 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 716 | View Replies]

To: Monitor
I'll be sure to ping you back to this thread tomorrow or whenever the text is posted to thomas.loc.gov.
718 posted on 02/26/2004 1:27:12 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 714 | View Replies]

To: Ancesthntr
OK, let's punish the RINOs and stand them up for the prom. They do deserve it.

Hey, I found a party where we all can go! Guns & Dope Party

719 posted on 02/26/2004 1:28:08 PM PST by Sender ("This is the most important election in the history of the world." -DU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 715 | View Replies]

To: Sender
Tpp many Fnords over there. They always double dip the cheeze spread.
720 posted on 02/26/2004 1:30:29 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 719 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 681-700701-720721-740 ... 921-923 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson