The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 18, 2013, 08:07 AM   #401
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 3,881
Quote:
I just got done watching President Obama's remarks about these bills. I happened to notice VP Biden standing off to the side. Is it just me, or did he look like Walter?
He is Walter, thats why all he can say is buy a shotgun buy a shotgun
rebs is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 08:38 AM   #402
KyJim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Maybe National Reciprocity isn't so far off after all.
Double edged sword. Another hook by the federal government into guns. Maybe not at first, but later down the road. I really empathize, though, for the folks in states like New York.
KyJim is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 08:41 AM   #403
cvc944
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 17, 2013
Location: Lenhartsville, PA
Posts: 164
Biden may look like Walter, but Walter is no fool, whereas Biden is the old fool there's no fool like. Speaking of shotguns, this man advised someone to fire one through an open window at night. What could possibly go wrong there? I just hope they don't let him near the stove when no one is home.
cvc944 is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 08:58 AM   #404
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 3,881
Is reids gun proposal going to be live on c span today ? Where would I find it ?
rebs is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 09:04 AM   #405
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
Senate Floor Webcast schedule and link
Pulled from that website, created by government employee on government dime making it open source according to wikipedia-
Quote:
Schedule for Thursday, Apr 18, 2013
9:30 a.m.: Convene and resume consideration of S.649, the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013.
That's 9:30 Eastern
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 09:39 AM   #406
Gaerek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 939
Here's my take on what's going to happen. Although Reid voted 'Nay' to give himself the ability to bring it up to a vote at another time, I believe it's highly unlikely he will for this current session.

Polls are showing that gun control/rights are about #6 or #7 in the population's priority list. People want something done about the Economy, Obamacare, Immigration, etc, before they want to worry about guns. The Senate spent 4 months trying to get gun control legislation through. They have failed. Constituents on both sides of the issue, at this point, want to see the Senate move on to other (what they deem) more important issues.

For any "purple" or "red" state democrat (like Reid) to bring the issue up again would be like telling everyone, "Hey, I don't want to get elected again!" Voters want him to move on, and deal with other issues.

This doesn't meant the fight is over. 1) The fight is moving to the states. This means that if we either want our rights back, or not to lose anymore rights, it's really important to join our state and local gun rights groups. 2) It's very likely we're going to go through all of this again if there's another shooting (God forbid...), or after the mid-term elections, assuming there's not much change in power in either house, or a change to the blue side. But for the immediate time, it seems like the fight is over at the Federal level.
Gaerek is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 10:55 AM   #407
Bartholomew Roberts
member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
They are still debating this morning; but nothing substantive happening. Just the usual mix of blood dancing, shame on you, cold dead hands, etc.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 10:55 AM   #408
Coyote Blue
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2011
Location: West Miami,Florida
Posts: 118
Quote:
I was amazed that Reid in NV voted nay. He must be worried about being relected.
See the earlier posts. Reid voted nay for procedural reasons only. He will almost certainly not be running again in 2016.
__________________
"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." G.K. Chesterton

From The Cleveland Press, March 1, 1921
Coyote Blue is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 11:01 AM   #409
Bartholomew Roberts
member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
Voting resumes. Barrasco amendment on privacy for private gun owner info now.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 11:12 AM   #410
Come and take it.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 999
I would gloat over the major victory we have won but this video says it best.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a56_1366265591

according to the GOAs news alert I received the Harry Reids main bill will be up for a cloture vote and if the cloture fails than the bill is dead.

The liberals can rant all they want and make it look like this isn't over, but effectively it will take some time before a major attack like this from the congress will take place.

The biggest threat now is through the executive branch. Obama is exploiting every loophole he can find to disarm americans.
Come and take it. is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 11:47 AM   #411
Bartholomew Roberts
member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
Harkins-Alexander Amendment on mental health passed 95-2. Lee and Paul were only No votes. Senate recessed until 2pm, then they will take up judicial nominations. Probably not a lot of movement on gun stuff.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 12:43 PM   #412
Bartholomew Roberts
member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
Current status as of 4/18/2013 1:40 Eastern: All amendments required 60 votes to pass. The amendments to protect gun owner privacy and improve the mental health system oassed by solid majorities. The AWB and mag bans failed to achieve even 50 votes. The underlying S.649 bill is still horrible and not something we would want to pass; however it is also unlikely to pass and needs 60 votes. The Senate is going to take up judicial nominations when they return. There is still a rumor that Reid may pull the bill from the floor rather than see it die in a final vote and put it on the legislative calendar for later.

Manchin-Toomey amendment #715. Failed 54-46

Grassley substitute amendment consistent with the summary which is at the desk; Failed 52-48

Leahy-Collins amendment #713 (trafficking) Failed 58-42

Cornyn amendment #719 (conceal carry) Failed 57-43

Feinstein amendment #711 (assault weapons/clip bans) Failed 40-60

Burr amendment #720 (veterans/guns) Failed 56-44

Lautenberg-Blumenthal amendment #714 (high capacity clip ban) Failed 46-54

Barrasso amendment #717 (privacy) Passed 67-30

Harkin-Alexander amendment relative to mental health Passed 95-2
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 01:19 PM   #413
Evan Thomas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
Quote:
There is still a rumor that Reid may pull the bill from the floor rather than see it die in a final vote and put it on the legislative calendar for later.
Not that this would be surprising, but it would be a tad hypocritical, after the bill's supporters made all that noise along the lines of "It must come up for a vote, we owe it to the children," etc., etc.
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry.
Evan Thomas is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 01:44 PM   #414
Bartholomew Roberts
member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
Reid up. Lecturing on guns again. Says they will come back to bill.

Stabenow - mental health
Coburn - UBC
Veterans issues

Reid pulled S.649. Promises it will be back. Senate moving on to S.743 for now.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 02:25 PM   #415
Dr Big Bird PhD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
I'm very happy about the turn out. As for the privacy amendment passing, how does TFL stand on that?
__________________
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor
Dr Big Bird PhD is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 02:34 PM   #416
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,817
Bartholomew Roberts, thank you for your work in keeping us all posted on these developments.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 02:36 PM   #417
motorhead0922
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 635
So, S.649 has a privacy provision, and a provision to supply mental health info to NICS. Sounds okay to me, although I haven't read through those 2 completely.

Was there anything in the base bill or was it "blank"? Why not pass it with these 2 items? Or was addressing mental health (the only thing that applies to Newtown, Aurora, and Tucson) really not the point of this exercise?
__________________
SAF, ACLDN, IDPA, handgunlaw.us
My AmazonSmile benefits SAF
I'd rather be carried by 6 than caged by 12.
2020: It's pronounced twenty twenty.
motorhead0922 is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 02:57 PM   #418
Glenn E. Meyer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
Hard to say where to drop this link but since this is a generic thread

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...270.html?hp=l7

Seems that Toomey is realizing the errors of his ways and wants to pull back. The article states that if he leaves the effort with Manchin that further weakens chances of reintroduced legislation.

Manchin is hangin on and trying to say that it is his fault and its not Obama's bill or Chucky's. A little off from reality I would think. He was on the tube with that gun hating blah, blah Joe Scarborough. I wonder if he is being offered up as the sacrificial goat for the failure.

Interestingly, Chuck Todd pointed out that Cornyn's reciprocity amend. got more votes that the original Toomey-Manchin one. Chucky was so incensed by the progun stuff that they wanted the 60 votes to keep evil guns out of NYC. So he was willing to lose the whole thing. So much for compromise. Why not trade UBC for Universal Carry? Oh, guns are just bad, real agenda for compromise?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 03:12 PM   #419
motorhead0922
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 635
So, Reid voted Nay, so he could bring it up later. Right? Why not have one or our Nay voters bring the bill up right now, with privacy and mental health provisions only? We pass it, and it's the good guys who did it. Political cover for pro-gun Senators.
__________________
SAF, ACLDN, IDPA, handgunlaw.us
My AmazonSmile benefits SAF
I'd rather be carried by 6 than caged by 12.
2020: It's pronounced twenty twenty.
motorhead0922 is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 03:15 PM   #420
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
That would be an amendment, you'd still have to get 60 votes. And no one in their right mind would vote Yea to strip the background check portion of the bill, they'd rather save their jobs and leave it in limbo.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 03:18 PM   #421
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
Quote:
Interestingly, Chuck Todd pointed out that Cornyn's reciprocity amend. got more votes that the original Toomey-Manchin one.
I noticed that yesterday. If we could get it through the Judiciary comittee it would pass with a simple majority I think? Hard part is getting it out of a committee with Schumer, Durbin, Franken, Leahy, and Feinstein though.

National Reciprocity isn't as far off as we think.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 03:18 PM   #422
KyJim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Why not trade UBC for Universal Carry? Oh, guns are just bad, real agenda for compromise?
Their idea of compromise:

1. Propose a 7 round mag limit and "compromise" to ten rounds, for now.

2. Propose a universal background check and then "compromise" by allowing you to leave a gun with your spouse at home for up to seven days without a UBC. If you're gone eight days, hubby and wife are felons.

Their idea of compromise is never about actually giving something up, it's simply taking less than they really want. They'll come back later for that.
KyJim is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 04:25 PM   #423
Glenn E. Meyer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
NY Magazine had an article on Gov. Cuomo. The way he came up with the 7 round limit was that he was told that the way you take down a rampager is on the reload. Thus, someone suggested a 5 round limit. Then - it was pointed out that most mags (in the mag limiting states) were 10 rounds. So he said - let's do 7! It was later pointed out that this was ridiculous and then they said you could have a 10 but only load 7.

Even the NY Times and NY Mag (Not gun friendly) said he didn't know what he was doing. Haha.

I agree that there was no true compromise ever.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 04:28 PM   #424
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
The funniest part to me, is it seems that's wide open to challenge. Someone with the right 1911 and mag would be able to fully load their firearm, while the guy with the 9mm glock wouldn't be able to get full use of their possession.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 18, 2013, 05:08 PM   #425
Bartholomew Roberts
member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
The base bill is S. 649, which contains Senator Schumer's S. 374 Registration, as well as two non-controversial parts (trafficking and hardening school security). The background check part of S. 649 is bad enough we don't want anything bad enough to pass it though. I wouldn't even trade an NFA Repeal for that.

The two amendments that passed today are:

1. Barasso - punishes states who publish private gun owner info (like CHL lists)
2. Harkins-Alexander - bipartisan mish-mash of various mental health and improved NICS reporting issues, including all of S.480 (good for us) and other bills I am still reading.

Reid pulled S.649. My take is that nothing will go anywhere unless someone comes up with a way to 60 votes. The antis will either have to take less than Toomey-Manchin or ride the next wave of emotion to 60 votes.

Having said that, Coburn's amendment could break the current impasse.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.12916 seconds with 9 queries