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

Skip to comments.

Republican Senator Introduces Ban on Federal Gun Control
Breitbart.com ^ | 03/27/2015 | AWR Hawkins

Posted on 03/27/2015 8:57:39 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum

With the Senate focused on the 2016 budget, Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) has proposed an amendment that would ban federally mandated gun control.

Lee’s amendment would ban any future gun control from lawmakers that fails to garner “two-thirds of senators” in support. It would also ban regulations issued by agencies like the ATF.

According to The Hill, Senators David Ritter (R-La) and James Inhofe (R-Okla) have also introduced their own amendment. More narrowly drawn, theirs focuses on the ATF by prohibiting that agency from “attempting to ban bullets that are primarily used by hunters and sportsmen.”

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 114th; banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
To: Darksheare
Apologies if I mis-focused.
21 posted on 03/27/2015 9:28:48 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks ("If he were working for the other side, what would he be doing differently ?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

No, not you.
Someone else is throwing a fit because we all spotted an inherent problem with the bill.
So they focused on me out of everyone who made the same observation.


22 posted on 03/27/2015 9:29:39 AM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
“attempting to ban bullets that are primarily used by hunters and sportsmen.”

IRRELEVANT.

The 2nd Amendment is not the right to own and use sporting goods; it is the right to OWN AND CARRY WEAPONS OF MILITARY UTILITY (per US v Miller, and the Founders), light arms AND crew-served weapons that able to project deadly force at distance, that are equal in power to the Government's arms.

Anything less is capitulation and destined to put us in chains.

23 posted on 03/27/2015 9:30:42 AM PDT by backwoods-engineer (Blog: www.BackwoodsEngineer.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backwoods-engineer

BUMP.


24 posted on 03/27/2015 9:32:53 AM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum; Travis McGee
More narrowly drawn, theirs focuses on the ATF by prohibiting that agency from “attempting to ban bullets that are primarily used by hunters and sportsmen.”

It's even easier than that: If a weapon or ammo is found to be unlawful for U.S. citizens, then it should also be banned as unlawful for any police use by civilian police agencies, local, state or federal. A cop who then violates the law immediately forfeits his job, any accrued pension or retirement fund, and if the wepons was actually used, may then be charged with waging war on the civilian population of the United States, with the penalty prescribed for such action.

25 posted on 03/27/2015 10:01:28 AM PDT by archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Exactly right. Miller wasn’t there, either.


26 posted on 03/27/2015 11:15:00 AM PDT by backwoods-engineer (Blog: www.BackwoodsEngineer.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: backwoods-engineer

Miller was dead. His lawyer thought the point moot so he didn’t show up.


27 posted on 03/27/2015 11:21:52 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (True followers of Christ emulate Christ. True followers of Mohammed emulate Mohammed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: petro45acp

????????????????????

Cheers


28 posted on 03/27/2015 11:46:53 AM PDT by petro45acp (Grubbers "stupid" electorate is starting to look very much like Romney's 47%. Just sayin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: petro45acp

Had ENOUGH Yet ? ........................ Enforce the Bill of Rights ......... It’s the LAW !!!


29 posted on 03/27/2015 12:08:18 PM PDT by S.O.S121.500 (Had ENOUGH Yet ? ........................ Enforce the Bill of Rights ......... It's the LAW !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare; petro45acp; rarestia; Eric in the Ozarks

Yours was just the first comment to pick nits. They’re as guilty as you are.

This bill is a good thing, and something we can pass and the President will veto. That’s a good thing too.

We should be passing bill after bill after bill - one a week.

He should be vetoing them just as fast. You pass bills that define your entire platform so that when the time comes to run, you can point to all the good things the other side WON’T do that you will.

It isn’t rocket science. I’m just glad we worked so hard for a historic majority, only to have a couple of Democrats led it.


30 posted on 03/27/2015 12:14:30 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs; petro45acp; rarestia; Eric in the Ozarks

“Yours was just the first comment to pick nits. “

So you focus ONLY on one person.
*Golf clap*
Way to go.
And, as mentioned, the bill has major flaws that would be problematic AS WE MENTIONED.
For OTHER issues, see posts 23 and 25!


31 posted on 03/27/2015 12:23:22 PM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

Nit picker not I...


32 posted on 03/27/2015 12:25:28 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks ("If he were working for the other side, what would he be doing differently ?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

There’s no perfect bill. Period. This one can win, and it isn’t just symbolic. It should pass.

Your attitude on this is why we pull defeat from the jaws of victory every time. It’s far, far better with almost no downside.

Today, Obola just goes around Congress. They wouldn’t be able to with this. It binds the White Hut.


33 posted on 03/27/2015 12:27:13 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

Apparently for the poster at 30, pointing out that the makeup of congress can be problematic with the 2/3 rule and future gun rights is “nit picking”.


34 posted on 03/27/2015 12:28:01 PM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs; petro45acp; rarestia; Eric in the Ozarks

“There’s no perfect bill. Period.”

So your answer is to make it so that future problematic congress critters can by simple 2/3 vote restrict something guaranteed by the Bill of Rights?

How about something revolutionary instead, like: ENFORCE THE BILL OF RIGHTS AS WRITTEN.

RinaseaofDs, you are barking up the wrong tree.
The others I’m pinging also mentioned the SAME problem I noticed with this bill.
YOU seem to have a big bug up your backside about it.


35 posted on 03/27/2015 12:30:31 PM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

They’re going around it now anyway. Full Stop. ‘well regulated militia’ is the problem. Right now, any collection of black-robed idiots in the country can, and have, gutted the law.

You can’t have guns in cities like NYC. Just can’t do it.

To enforce the amendment, as written, involves a well regulated militia. If it weren’t for the NRA, the 2nd would have been toast a while back.

This bill is worth passing, because it doesn’t involve a well-regulated militia, and you still have the courts to fall back on, though that is no real comfort.


36 posted on 03/27/2015 12:39:02 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

“They’re going around it now anyway. “

Yes, and this bill will do very little to change that.
Tell me, do YOU trust the RINOs in any way shape or form?
I don’t.
And all it takes is a bunch of Olympia Snowes, Mitch McConnells, McCains, Grahams, etc in both sides of Congress to royally screw us.
But it would be all nice and legal like under this bill!


37 posted on 03/27/2015 12:40:42 PM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

It would be as legal under this bill as the handgun ban in NYC is today. Unless the amendment is rewritten so that it does tie gun ownership to being in a militia, then FedZilla, StateZilla, and all the baby Zillas are going to continue to go around it.

I personally think that if the USG can have it, then people should be able to have it - as long as it can be carried and fired. Mechanized arms are another matter.

Problem is, its all tied to a term people today feign ignorance about, when they know the term ‘militia’ referred to citizens resisting tyrannical forms of governance.

I’m a big fan of Black Talons. I’m glad they go through ballistic armor. I’m quite sure the USG will use them on me the day they decide Posse Comitatus (you should see how weak the foundation of that bit of protection is!) is an outmoded concept.

Every single one of is a criminal under the current set of laws and regulations. It’s impossible not to be. Felons lose the ability to protect themselves under the 2nd, and nobody is bothered by that. It’s just a small infraction of the 2nd, among many, many other cuts.


38 posted on 03/27/2015 12:50:35 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

No.
As stated in the article, a simple 2/3 vote and the ban is legal.
Just like the Third Reich’s “all nice and legal” atrocities.
The laws were passed, it was voted on, it was legal.

And you’re trusting RINOs not to act like RINOs and support the Dem positions as they always do.
That is a megafail.


39 posted on 03/27/2015 12:52:49 PM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

Today they are just doing it - legal authority or no legal authority.

Next time someone does it, I’d like there to be a record of it. That way there’s a list.

ATF, today, just does it. No legal authority whatsoever. Ban 5.56 ammo. No problem. Ban lead in ammo - no problem. I’m surprise they haven’t thought of something like banning the use of firing pins.

Unlike what Boehner pulled with Obamacare earlier this term, he brought it to the floor because he didn’t have the votes.

This bill goes IF they have the votes. I say let them bring it. If Poland was a trip wire for NATO, then let this be the trip wire for CWII. Pass it and we’ll now where we stand. If 2/3 are willing to excise the second - heck, make it 3/4’s. If its numbers that trouble you, and 67 Senators wanting to take the 2nd down isn’t bad enough, make it 75 - 8 more votes.

What difference does it make on the Hill if they thought they could ram gun control through and get 2/3 of the Senate? Make it 3/4 - that’s what it would take to erase the amendment anyway. If you think we are nearly there, then make it 3/4, but no matter what - there should be a record. A list. Something you can spool around a crossbow bolt.


40 posted on 03/27/2015 1:03:07 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 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