background check compromise falls 6 votes short

[koalabear]

Despite an impassioned push by President Barack Obama and an emotional lobbying effort by the families of mass shooting victims, proponents of a compromise measure to expand gun background checks on Wednesday fell six votes short of passage in the Senate.

The vote on the amendment was 54 to 46. Sixty votes were needed for the amendment to be adopted.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/...und-check-compromise-falls-6-votes-short?lite

 

[Squibbs]

Shut up, moron.

 

[koalabear]

Shut up, moron.

Shut up, moron.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Wow, that's a lot closer than I expected it to be. I was expecting at least 12 shy. I must be getting old.

 

[blue_pearl_85]

Gotta love those 46 vote majorities.

 

[Liar]

Am I missing something here? Or are y'all so used to 60 votes beng the new normal that you can't be arsed to even say the F word anymore?

 

[koalabear]

Am I missing something here? Or are y'all so used to 60 votes beng the new normal that you can't be arsed to even say the F word anymore?

FORD!

 

[run_silent]

Despite how you feel about gun control did you see anything in this bill that would have prevented the latest tragedies? The answer is no. Try to refute this with facts and not maybes.

 

[WeedSmoke420]

interesting..

 

[Peregrinator]

Guns Rights Activist Endorses Expanded Background Checks

The Citizen's Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is backing a compromise gun registration amendment proposed by Senators Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey. Robert Siegel talks with Committee chairman Alan Gottleib about why his group is splitting from the National Rife Association and supporting background checks for all commercial transfers of guns.

Copyright © 2013 NPR. For personal, noncommercial use only. See Terms of Use. For other uses, prior permission required.

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

The background checks proposal that Ailsa mentioned is an amendment put forward by Democrat Joe Manchin and Republican Pat Toomey. It would expand background checks to include gun shows and Internet sales.

Among gun rights activists, Alan Gottlieb is a figure of consequence. So his support of the Manchin-Toomey amendment is meaningful. Gottlieb's Second Amendment Foundation has been involved in several high profile cases, including the Heller decision. That's the landmark ruling affirmed the right to own a gun for self-protection, not just to serve in a militia.

Mr. Gottlieb joins us from Belleview, Washington. Welcome to the program.

ALAN GOTTLIEB: Good to be with you. Thank you.

SIEGEL: And you emailed the members of the other organization that you chair, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. We read the bill. We like the bill. And you said, it includes, I quote, "advances for our cause." What's an advance for the cause of gun rights in this bill?

GOTTLIEB: Well, first, it protects and advances. In the protection area, it flat out states that no national firearm gun registry can be created. And then, not only that, it states that if any government employee or any official tried to create a registry system from it or misuse the data - even leak it to the media to publish names of gun owners, as an example - they'd be committing a felony with a 15 year prison sentence.

As far as expanding gun rights, it would now allow the citizens of the United States to buy a handgun anywhere in the country, not just in your home state of residence but you could buy it anywhere. It also has a protection provision in there that makes it better for gun owners traveling across the country, if you have a gun with you while you're traveling and you get to a highly restrictive state, say like maybe New York or New Jersey, and you stop for gas or your car breaks down or you spend a night in a motel, then you couldn't be detained or arrested for breaking their gun law because you're traveling through the state.

That is a great protection for gun owners, as well.

SIEGEL: Your group's bottom line here is different than that of the NRA. Does your group take a different view of gun rights than the NRA does?

GOTTLIEB: I don't think our bottom line is really different. I think our strategy may be a little bit different. We don't take a different view. I think the reason why the NRA is not supporting it, quite frankly, because the atmosphere out there has become toxic. When you have the president of the United States running around screaming for banning guns and magazines and Dianne Feinstein and Senator Schumer going for Draconian gun laws and Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York, you know, signing a law that says you can only have seven bullets in your gun for self protection, you create an environment, quite frankly, that everybody backs into their corners.

And so, at this point, everybody's worried what might happen and it's just the same as doing nothing.

SIEGEL: Are the advances in this bill, as you see them, sufficiently important that you would oppose, say, a Republican amendment, one might be a total national reciprocity on conceal carry permits that would be so unacceptable to Democrats that they would prove to be poison pills? That is, is this bill, as you've read it, better than no bill at all?

GOTTLIEB: This bill is definitely better than no bill at all, but I still would support those Republican amendments for reciprocity or any amendment that would obviously strengthen gun rights, I would obviously support. And if the Democrats didn't want to, quote-unquote, "go along with that," it would show that they're the extreme people, not my side being extreme.

SIEGEL: Mr. Gottlieb, you've mentioned what the president has said, what Senator Feinstein has said, what Governor Cuomo in New York has called for, but aren't there also public opinion polls which actually show that significant majorities of Americans can imagine controls on gun sales and ownership that are just completely unacceptable to your group or to the National Rifle Association?

GOTTLIEB: Well, there's no doubt the public opinion polls show, quite honestly, that the American people support a background check overwhelmingly and that gun owners support a background check overwhelmingly. The problem is, the devil's always in the details. If you write the background check the right way, just like the Manchin/Toomey thing is, you know, I'm supporting it.

But if you write it the wrong way, then it infringes on my rights and, quite frankly, doesn't do anything to solve the problem to begin with, I'm not going to support it. So it all depends on how it's written.

SIEGEL: And since I gather Senators Toomey and Manchin are scrapping, they need some votes and it's not that easy in the Senate, would the Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms, the group you chair, would you urge other, say, Republican senators to join them in supporting that amendment?

GOTTLIEB: We have done that, yes, by all means. That's why I think this Manchin/Toomey amendment gives us lots of protections and advances our rights and our cause a whole lot. In return for that background check that's done, you know, again, in commercial environments only. It doesn't prevent me from selling a gun to a friend or giving one to my son and I think it makes sense.

SIEGEL: Mr. Gottlieb, thank you very much for talking with us about it.

GOTTLIEB: Thank you.

SIEGEL: That's Alan Gottlieb; spoke to us from Bellevue, Washington. He's the chair of the Citizen's Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms.

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/16/177507489/guns-rights-activist-endorses-expanded-background-checks

 

[Sean Renaud]

Despite how you feel about gun control did you see anything in this bill that would have prevented the latest tragedies? The answer is no. Try to refute this with facts and not maybes.

Yes. Jared Loughner probably wouldn't have passed a stricter background check.

 

[Peregrinator]

Am I missing something here? Or are y'all so used to 60 votes beng the new normal that you can't be arsed to even say the F word anymore?

Fnord?

 

[brw02]

Yes. Jared Loughner probably wouldn't have passed a stricter background check.

run_silent's question is irrelevant. It was merely a ploy to draw attention away from important questions. The Manchin-Toomey proposal is an attempt to stop some dangerous people from buying guns anonymously. No law is going to change what has already happened.

 

[Busybody]

this thread SUCKS


this is better http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=44156161#post44156161

 

[WeedSmoke420]

this thread SUCKS


this is better http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=44156161#post44156161

eh...

 

[Sean Renaud]

run_silent's question is irrelevant. It was merely a ploy to draw attention away from important questions. The Manchin-Toomey proposal is an attempt to stop some dangerous people from buying guns anonymously. No law is going to change what has already happened.

Except it really isn't. If a new law isn't going to change any of our existing reality (granted the truth is that you can only pass laws changing things when something tragic takes place and this isn't just about massacres, it's also about daily gun violence and the such) then we probably shouldn't bother.

 

[Busybody]

eh...

 

[WeedSmoke420]

lol...what? what happen

 

[BoyNextDoor]

That's going to cost the Republicans in 2014.

 

[run_silent]

Yes. Jared Loughner probably wouldn't have passed a stricter background check.

There is nothing in the bill that would have stopped him from buying the gun.

 

[WeedSmoke420]

That's going to cost the Republicans in 2014.

you think so

 

[RjThoughts]

Abraham Lincoln spoke of "A government of the people, by for the people, for the people." Today, he would write, "A government of the people, by the people, FUCK the people."

Overwhelming numbers, done by EVERY pollster, say the American public IS for background checks, yet the Legislators we elected to Congress do NOT care what we want or like.

FUCK the people indeed!!

 

[Sean Renaud]

That's going to cost the Republicans in 2014.

Unlikely. By the time that comes around people will have long forgotten.

There is nothing in the bill that would have stopped him from buying the gun.

You base this on?

 

[Busybody]

Abraham Lincoln spoke of "A government of the people, by for the people, for the people." Today, he would write, "A government of the people, by the people, FUCK the people."

Overwhelming numbers, done by EVERY pollster, say the American public IS for background checks, yet the Legislators we elected to Congress do NOT care what we want or like.

FUCK the people indeed!!

this is BS


as ususal

 

[IndieSnob]

I wonder how many bonus checks the NRA is making out today.

Lobbying at its finest.