April 17, 2013, 06:24 AM | #76 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
http://www.volokh.com/2013/04/15/the...f-gun-control/
If you are being asked to give up rights, and the promise is you will get gun rights things that are great but really well hidden and we can't tell you about them but trust me... Would you take that deal? Would knowing that Schumer, Bloomberg, Biden and their lawyers signed off on the deal make you suspicious? Many of the "great deals" for gun rights are things that FOPA 1986 was supposed to have given us already - interstate travel, no federal registry. |
April 17, 2013, 11:30 AM | #77 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 14, 2009
Location: Sunshine and Keystone States
Posts: 4,461
|
Looks like it's on its way to defeat. A victory for freedom.
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/electio...eck-amendment/ |
April 17, 2013, 11:53 AM | #78 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 939
|
Quote:
Long Answer: Hell Yes Any supposed "pro-gun" bill signed off by a known "anti-gunner" is something I don't want any part of. |
|
April 17, 2013, 12:10 PM | #79 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 5, 2008
Posts: 182
|
Quote:
|
|
April 17, 2013, 12:39 PM | #80 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
CCRKBA pulls support for Toomey-Manchin: http://www.examiner.com/article/ccrk...manchin-toomey
Way to step in and be decisive after it was already dead. |
April 17, 2013, 12:50 PM | #81 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
|
|
April 17, 2013, 01:04 PM | #82 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 17, 2006
Posts: 261
|
Regardless
what happens with this, I intend to continue to remind my Senators & Reps that the way to fight crime is not to make honest citizens criminals.
They keep talking about compromise and we NEVER get anything back in return for our concessions. This is a fight forevermore for the life of the Constitution. |
April 17, 2013, 03:29 PM | #83 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 14, 2009
Location: Sunshine and Keystone States
Posts: 4,461
|
Celebrating failure to further limit freedom, 54-46. Even old Harry Reid voted No.
|
April 17, 2013, 07:01 PM | #84 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
If your senator voted with us, please, PLEASE take a moment to send an email to thank him or her.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
April 17, 2013, 07:59 PM | #85 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 17, 2013
Location: Lenhartsville, PA
Posts: 164
|
Already done. I crafted a very nice note and sent it to all of them, thanking them for their courage. For doing the sensible thing. For not passing another law that is not a solution, but a reaction to a problem. There was a second note I crafted for those who did not.
|
April 19, 2013, 08:10 PM | #86 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 5, 2008
Posts: 182
|
Gottlieb can now say he was against the bill before he was for it before he was against it. He and Kerry are more alike than we knew.
|
April 19, 2013, 08:57 PM | #87 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 23, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 1,039
|
To Spats post
I have already thanked Senator Blount from MO for voting the correct way "against all the amendments" AND I have informed Senator McCaskill that not only will I never consider voting FOR her again, I will be vehemently working for whomever her opponent is!!!
That vote (at least from a Missouri point of view) points out that history repeats itself. During Lincoln's war of northern agression against the south aka the civil war, MO was split |
April 19, 2013, 09:31 PM | #88 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
April 21, 2013, 06:50 AM | #89 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 301
|
Toomey-Manchin Amendment
Unless his motives were to totally screw up the process and confuse most of the Senators. After looking over the contents if you voted for the bill you would have had stomach a number of things that you were against, and if you voted against the bill because nothing's you disagreed with you had to say good by to some major changes you might have been in favor of. But still if this passed it would have been confusing for both sides from what I can gather. It is confusing for me.
|
April 21, 2013, 03:21 PM | #90 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Who was he trying to confuse though? Every single anti voted for it and Schumer begged for it to pass on the floor of the Senate. If he was trying to discourage antis from voting for a UBC, it doesn't seem to have been successful.
|
April 21, 2013, 05:47 PM | #91 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
I would not automatically turn on Gottlieb for trying to influence the outcome of a bill. We have no idea the goings on behind closed doors. If anyone has earned the benefit of doubt, it's Alan Gottlieb.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|