Senate fails to pass gun regs

| April 17, 2013

Pat sends us a link to the Washington Post which tearfully reports that the new gun control regulations have failed to get the necessary number of votes in the Senate. And it went down in a bipartisan vote;

The vote on the so-called Manchin-Toomey amendment was 54 in favor, 46 against — failing to reach the 60-vote threshold needed to move ahead. Four Republicans supported it, and four Democrats voted no.

Two screeching gun control harpies were removed from the chamber when they shouted “Shame on you!” to no one in particular.

“They are an embarrassment to this country, that they don’t have any compassion or care for people who have been taken brutally from their families,” Maisch said as officers attempted to remove her from the building. “I hate them,” she said of the senators.

“We’re sick and tired of the death in this country and these legislators stand up there and think it’s a bunch of numbers,” said Haas, whose daughter, Emily, was wounded in the April 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech.

“It’s a shame, it’s appalling, it’s disgusting,” she added.

I guess they couldn’t find anyone who was pleased the bill was defeated, because they didn’t bother to interview anyone with that particular view. Oh, by the way, one of those Republicans who defected was – surprise! – John McCain;

“Is this a perfect solution? No. will it prevent all future acts of gun violence? Of course not,” McCain said. “Would it have prevented the most recent acts of gun violence? In all likelihood, no. But it is reasonable, and it is my firm conviction that it is constitutional.”

So, McCain just thought that he should “do something” irrespective of the result. Who needs him? Harry Reid, at the last minute decided that he’d vote for it, too, I know, you’re surprised;

In a notable reversal, Reid said he would vote for a proposed assault weapon ban “because maintaining a law and order is more important than satisfying conspiracy theories, who believe in black helicopters and false flags. I’ll vote for the ban because saving the lives of police officers – young and old – and innocent civilians – young and old, is more important than preventing imagined tyranny.”

The tyranny that Harry, the draft dodger, says is imagined, is right there in his mirror every morning.

Joe Bite Me, probably one of the big reasons that bill failed, since he was riding herd on gun control and couldn’t keep his lips from flapping about the most ridiculous shit on the planet was fairly pissed;

Biden reiterated that the proposal would not create or lead to the creation of a federal gun registry. “Nothing can be further from the truth,” he said.

Biden also dismissed suggestions that the measures would infringe upon people’s constitutional right to bear arms.

“There is no – zero – no infringement on the Second Amendment, not one single thing being proposed,” he said.

Yeah, well, no one on the planet believes a thing you’re saying anymore, Bite Me. You’re a punch line. You should resign. After Sandy Hook, gun control was a slam dunk and the president guaranteed it’s failure by putting Bite Me in charge of it.

What a wet firecracker. Yeah, and if the Left wants to blame someone, blame Biden and the other morons who thought they had something to contribute to the debate, but they were uninformed and downright ignorant and dishonest. Blame the inflated statistics and polls. Blame Bloomberg for being a rich guy trying to shove his personal ignorance down our collective throat. The soft drink ban in NYC contributed to this failure as much as anything. Blame Mark Kelly for trying to deny stuff for the rest of us while buying the same stuff for himself.

The gun grabbers showed their collective ass throughout the “national discussion” and no real American wanted to be seen as part of the ignorant, hypocritical crowd who wanted to disarm America while clinging to their own guns. And now, despite the failure of the legislation, the Democrats are going to pay for their lies to our face next November. Now they know why the Clinton Gun Ban wasn’t renewed last decade.

Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

177 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
insipid

@94- There’s been ample studies and little evidence of porn causing any real or lasting harm. This is in contrast to guns which DOES cause harm. Furthermore, the advocates of the gun industry do everything in their power to prevent studies.

But, unlike you, i’m stating categorically that there SHOULD be regulations on porn that is sold, where it is sold and to whom it is sold. I am much less fetishistic concerning pornograph than you are in regards to guns which is basically anything, to anyone, anywhere.

I work for a very popular internet cite. The vast majority of their product is used at peoples homes, not anywhere else.

insipid

@100- first off the level of Obstructionism is FAR greater under GOP rule then it’s ever been under Democrats. Secondly i’ve ALWAYS been against the filibuster, regardless of which party employs it.

NHSparky

I’m sure all those porn addicts would disagree, sippy. Ditto the “actresses” of said flicks. Check out the drug abuse and suicide rates among that particular demographic, if you’d be so kind.

And it’s “Internet site.” Once again lending credence that your literary skill consists of translating, “Ooooh, ahhhh!” from Czech to English, and not particularly skillful at that.

Old Trooper

@81: I am rational. you’re the one acting like a spoiled brat that was just told no for the first time.

As for your “study” in #80: Why don’t you throw up the FBI numbers over the last 20 years? You don’t need the Brady Campaign to do the work, which of course is biased towards their ends, just look at the data compiled by the FBI, which is much more accurate and informative than Brady Bunch bullshit.

NHSparky

Oh goody sippy–then you’ll be so kind as to show me examples of said “obstructionism” that the GOP has invoked in the Senate which the Democrats under then-Minority Leader Harry Reid DID NOT also use.

Goose, gander, shit like that.

insipid

@99- Last i looked, Chicago is not a state. Illinois is and it has a lower rate of gun violence then states with more lax laws. DC is not a state either. Furthermore, big-cities like New York that do NOT have surrounding states with lax laws have great success curtailing gun violence.

insipid

@105- I just said I’m not a fan of Reid. Fuck Reid. Happy. That being said, the level of obstruction then is much less than it is now.

Ex-PH2

Spiffy, you dumb, stump-sucking, illiterate, bean-brained blitherin idiot — there ARE regulations in place on porn, dumbfracker!@!!

Just how incredibly STUPID do you want to go on making yourself appear? Huh?????? OF all the stupid-ass things you’ve said, THAT is the DUMBEST of all.

Places on the internet, are called ‘SITES’, just for your information. Geebus cheesewhiz, you can’t spell, you can’t do research, you can’t even get a job that has some dignity to it.

SITE is a noun meaning (among other things) a PLACE, therefore an internet SITE is a PLACE on the internet.

CITE is a verb, meaning, e.g., to CITE an example; a derivative noun is CITATION.

MGySgtRet

OK Sippy, here you go:
You said, “There’s no way even you believe that the section of the Constitution regarding rules of procedure was intended to allow the bodies of Congress to circumvent the Constitution regarding its most basic functions thus ammending the Constitution by fiat.” Well apparently your beloved president does not believe either because he is not scared to rule by fiat, or back room deals or ignoring the will of the people.

You also stated, “Furthermore, the filibuster as it is practiced now eliminates the grand bargain.” Excuse me, but when president Bush was in office, the filibuster was considered the highest form of patriotism, used to keep Bush in his place when the Democrats did not have majorities. Now when Republicans use it, you want to get into “as it is practiced now”. Oh, o.k. got it.

And your whole last paragraph trying to use the tired old “the 2nd Amendment is just for militias” aint going to fly. You are once again cherry picking to make your point.

Just stop. You are full of shit.

insipid

Here’s an article with stats taken directly from the FBI which says the same thing. The states with the most lax gun laws have the most gun violence.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

Unless if you start demanding that i can only cite Larry Pratt, you’re not going to win this one.

NHSparky

Uh, try again, sippy. It’s been a fact of life since the Senate was formed. And you can’t cherry pick the policies of your party.

Own it, beyotch.

Face it–urban areas have the highest RATES of crime, not just total numbers. They also have the most restrictive gun laws. FYI.

Funny how what you don’t want to or can’t admit is that since 1986 when states went almost uniformly from “No-Issue” to “Shall-Issue” or “No Restriction” laws, the crime in those areas has gone WAY down. My humble little burb hasn’t had a murder in over 15 years. Do a little Google search on Kennesaw, GA. Shootouts in the street? Yeah, not so much.

NHSparky

Sippy, not to say you’re full of shit, but you’re full of shit.

Try THE ACTUAL STATS, not what some leftist hack Brits tell you they say, mkay?

UpNOrth

@66. “a product that kills 10s of thousands of people each year”? Well, Sippy, if you’re speaking of firearms, you’re wrong, yet again. But then, I’m sure you blame a car if someone is killed by the driver of the car, right?
I put my deer rifle in a chair on my deck yesterday, all day. With ammo at hand. It didn’t kill anyone, it didn’t even load itself.
I see that you can’t accept that Harry Reid is in charge of the Senate, and he could have changed the rules any time he wanted, and hasn’t, so far.

Ex-PH2

On top of everything you’ve said today, Splinky, you just proved repeatedly how dumb you are.

Chicago has a higher population density than the rest of the state of Illinois. IF I want to, I can pull statistics for every CITY and VILLAGE in Illinois. I have better things to do than keep proving you wrong. Chicago, Cook County and surrounding collar counties ARE valid statistics for the State of Illinois, but I can include St. Louis, Springfield, Pana, Effingham, Carbondale, Champaign, Mattoon, Matteson, Dekalb, etc.

And let’s not forget that in February, Northern Illinois University in DeKalb observed its anniversary of the mass shooting that took place on Feb. 14, 2008, when Stephen Kazcmierczak went on a rampage.

You’re so full of crap. But it explains why your eyes are brown instead of blue.

Hondo

Sippy, your Pin Head is showing.

The Constitution indeed spells out where a legislative supermajority is required – e.g., Constitutional Amendments (Article 5), Impeachment Trials (Article I, Section 3), Expulsion of a Member (Article I, Section 5), Veto Overrides (Article I, Section 7), Treaty Ratification (Article 2, Section 2) and Presidential/Vice-Presidential Disability (25th Amendment). However, the Constitution does not establish an explicit voting standard for either House of Congress as to what constitutes passing a bill. In fact, the Constitution does NOT require that passage of a bill by either House of Congress must be by simple majority. That has been the general rule in each House of Congress, but is not explicitly required by the Constitution.

Rather, the Constitution gives each House of Congress full authority to decide its own rules as it sees fit. Therefore, if either the House or Senate wants to establish a different standard for passage of a particular bill – or all bills in general – they appear free to do so under the Constitution. All they have to do is so change their rules to require a supermajority to pass legislation. The Senate has effectively done this for select cases with its rules regarding filibuster.

Only two actions are specifically called out as requiring a simple majority in the Constitution. The first is that of election of the POTUS by the Electoral College. The only other place in which the Constitution refers to a “majority” is in Article I, Section 5, where it defines a majority of either House of Congress as a quorum.

insipid

@109- Just because you don’t know what the President ran on doesn’t mean we didn’t get it. He ran and won on a plan very similar to Obamacare.

Secondly, I’VE ALWAYS BEEN AGAINST THE FUCKING FILIBUSTER!!! I was against it then, i’m against it now, i’ll be against it tomorrow and- if it lasts that long- the rest of my life. Maybe there were Democrats raving at the relatively rare use of filibusters then- but I wasn’t one of them.

The grand bargain was the compromise between the different methods of representation in the Senate and the house. There’s ALREADY protections built in for the minority in the Senate. The filibuster adds a layer of “protection” not envisioned by the founders.

MGySgtRet

Ex-PH2, I told you earlier, stop using facts. Sippy don’t likee the facts, he likee the porn!!!!

UpNorth

Gee, all that time that Obama spent, standing on the bodies of the children and staff that were killed at Newtown, pandering and pimping, and he got…….bupkus. Too bad, so sad. Screw him and his moron side-kick.

MGySgtRet

Sippy, Obama didn’t have a plan for Obamacare. That is why he pushed it on to the House and Senate to write the goddamn thing for him. So he could throw them under the bus if it didn’t pass. And then through back room deals and procedural tricks, he got it passed. And then claimed credit for it, and then when he found out how unpopular it is and he had to win reelection he didn’t claim credit for it. And now that he does not have to face reelection, he is claiming it again. See how that works.

But I digress. I am pretty sure your hatred of the filibuster depends on which party is using it.

insipid

You’re wrong again, Hondo. The Constitution says a “Majority of each (body) shall constitute a Quorum to do Business”. The purpose of this provision, according the federalist papers, was to stop the minority from denying the majority by simply leaving (the same way it was done in Michigan by the Democrats). If the Constitution was against this MORE proactive method of blocking legislation, how can you argue they were for ONE Senator being able to silently block a vote as he or she please? When the Constitution explicitly states that something is required without a proviso to the contrary then it is construed that we can’t simply add our own provisions. The Constitution states where it wants a super majority. This gun bill does not meet those criteria.

Under your bizarre “interpretation” of the Constitution then I suppose the Democrats can decide tomorrow that it only takes 41 votes for Presidential appointments. Hell, since they get to make the rules, i guess the Democrats could pass a rule saying that only the majority power gets to vote.

And, if Harry Reid or Democrats did pass such legislation, i’d be protesting as loud as anyone.

insipid

Look i campaigned for Obama. I KNOW what he campaigned on better than anyone here. I’m telling you that the basic size and shape of what we got is what we campaigned on.

This is From OBAMA’S 2008 campaign White papers:

The Obama-Biden plan provides new affordable health insurance options by: (1) guaranteeing eligibility for all health insurance plans; (2) creating a National Health Insurance Exchange to help Americans and businesses purchase private health insurance; (3) providing new tax credits to families who can’t afford health insurance and to small businesses with a new Small Business Health Tax Credit; (4) requiring all large employers to contribute towards health coverage for their employees or towards the cost of the public plan; (5) requiring all children have health care coverage; (5) expanding eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs; and (6) allowing flexibility for state health reform plans.

That’s what he campaigned on, that’s what we voted on, that’s pretty much what we got.

Hondo

Sippy – you do realize you just cut the heart out of your own argument, right? CA has the highest 2011 Brady Score (and thus the most restrictive firearms laws in the nation). It has a firearms murder rate of 3.25 per 100k population. If your thesis is correct, it should have the lowest firearms murder rate in the nation. http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/stateleg/scorecard/2011/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdf Per the article you cited, the national average is 2.75 per 100k population. Oops. NJ has the 2nd most restrictive firearms laws in the nation per its Brady Score. It has a firearms murder rate of 3.07 per 100k population – also greater than the national average. NY has the 4th most restrictive firearms laws in the nation based on Brady Score. Its firearms murder rate? 4.12 per 100k population – well above the national average. MD (7th most restrictive firearms laws)? 4.7 per 100k population. IL (9th most restrictive)? 2.93 per 100k population. PA (10th most restrictive)? 3.97 per 100k population. MI (11th most restrictive and the last “2-star” rated state by Brady Score)? 5.07 per 100k population. Oops, oops, oops, oops, oops, and oops. In fact, 7 of the 11 states with the most restrictive firearms laws in the nation as measured by Brady Score have a higher rate of firearms murders than the national average. Interestingly enough, 3 states have a Brady Score of 0. Only one of them has a firearms murder rate higher than the national average: AZ. Six states have a Brady Score of 2. Only two of those states have a firearms rate higher than the national average: OK and LA. Of the 9 states with the least restrictive firearms laws, 6 have a firearms murder rate below the national average. In contrast, of the 11 states with the most restrictive firearms laws, 7 have a firearms murder rate higher than the national average. Are you familiar with the term “correlation” and what it implies? Obviously not. But thanks for the new data. I need to do an update of my earlier story showing that the Brady Score is unconnected from reality.… Read more »

Hondo

Sippy: are you so freaking ignorant you don’t know what a “quorum” is? A quorum is merely the minimum number of members of a deliberative assembly necessary to conduct the business of that group, dipstick. It has absolutely nothing to do with the majority required when that body makes its decisions. If a 2/3 majority is required to make a decision, that 2/3 majority is required at all times.

A body may have quorum requirements of “more than half” of all members to be present and still have a requirement for unanimous consent to pass a damn thing. At least one historical legislative body – the Polish Sejm of the 1600s – required unanimous consent to pass legislation.

Once again, you don’t have a clue as to what you’re talking about. But we’re used to that by now.

Ex-PH2

Guys, guys, guys! STOP! Insipid said his boss is in Czechoslovakia, that he (spiffy) gets $22 an hour for correcting sentences, and that he/she/it works in the porn industry.

Here’s a little item for all of you: human trafficking is one of the most horrible industries on this planet. Sex trafficking of women has been rising since the 1990s, when the USSR collapsed. Eastern Europe is notorious for sex trafficking, for forcing women who are seeking work into prostitution and trapping them by taking their passports away from them. They aren’t just working porn movies, they are forced to be prostitutes.

The estimate for 2011 for women in sex trafficking worldwide is 14,000,000. That’s 14 million women in all countries everywhere.

This link is to UNESCO’s human trafficking project website.

http://humantrafficking.org/links/83

I did not include the statistics for forced labor in other areas, nor did I include the statistics for child labor. Those statistics are on UNESCO’s webSITE. They are appalling.

This is the industry that Insipid works in, an industry that has a far worse impact on women and children than any other crime-related business on this planet. Insipid has become an enabler of this industry.

If this conceited slimeball could spend just 30 seconds in the company of people, adults and children both, who are victims of human trafficking, it might mean something.

I don’t know how in the hell you can justify what you are doing, you piece of garbage. I don’t understand how you can even look at yourself in the mirror and justify your own existence. The films your boss is picking up in the Czech Republic for sale in the USA are the product of women engaging in forced sex acts.

I have never been so thoroughly disgusted with anyone.

You are lower than the shit that flows through the sewer.

Twist

@124, and then he has the audacity to attempt to claim the moral high ground.

UpNorth

Nicely done, PPH2, very nice. And very true.

“The purpose of this provision, according the federalist papers, was to stop the minority from denying the majority by simply leaving (the same way it was done in Michigan by the Democrats)“. Sayeth Sippy the ignorant. It was Wisconsin, you illiterate, ignorant slimeball. PH2 is right, you’re beneath contempt, in so many ways.

MGySgtRet

Just stop it Twist. He CAMPAIGNED FOR OBAMA!!! Moral high ground written all over that!!!!!

Twist

UpNorth, it was also Indiana.

Ex-PH2

I forgot to add that Czechoslovakia no longer exists. When the USSR dissolved, the two states that Stalin had merged into one returned to their original boundaries and names.

They were and are the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Romania no longer exists as it was under the USSR. And until the Checnyan rebels took on the Moscow government, who had ever heard of Chechnya?

So, Insipid/Splinky/Spiffy/InShithead, you are not only WRONG about a lot of things, you are also guilty of moral terpitude.

NHSparky

Whoops, someone is gonna have a case of the flaming butthurts when he reads how his job isn’t the sunshine, roses, and kittens he tried to make it out to be.

What’s next, sippy? “I was just following orders?”

PintoNag

@24 No, company of the people who suffer human trafficking wouldn’t affect Insipid. He probably HAS been in their company — either using them personally or enjoying the end result. The only way it might possibly affect him is if he were the object being used. And I would only put that at “maybe.”

PintoNag

Sorry, #132 is addressed to #124, not #24.

insipid

@122- Yes, but as they are adopting more restrictive laws their averages are going down- oops. Also the states with the least restrictive gun laws have are the ones with the off-the-charts murder rates such as Louisiana, South Carolina- oops.

Also among the states with the most restrictive gun laws you have the least amount of deaths- Hawaii and Rhode Island. Hawaii is particularly illustrative by the fact that the problem of out-of-state smuggling is pretty-much eliminated by the fact that it’s an island.

insipid

@127- fuck you right back. Stop saying racist shit and i’ll stop calling you a racist, you piece of shit.

Ex-PH2

I know, PN, I know.

It only happens to OTHER people, has nothing to do with Splinky, so he/she/it doesn’t have to care.

insipid

@123- The Constitution says it requires a quorum of a majority TO DO BUSINESS that means voting. That means it just takes 50% + 1 to pass laws under the constitution as envisioned by the founders. Furthermore the function of the Vice president CLEARLY shows that they envisioned that their be a POSSIBILITY of a tie.

Twist

Insipid, shouldn’t you be out helping your employer exploit and victimize women?

Ex-PH2

Oh, my. Spiffy just screwed his own pooch.

Ex-PH2

In regard to racism, Jonn is white (Caucasian) and his wife is not.

And sexism? In regard to the women in combat roles and all that discussion about sex in the battlefield that frequently accompanied it, well, a lot of that was me (I’m a girl!!!OOO!) doing research and I wanted honest answers from MEN, which they willingly gave. That is NOT sexism, jackass.

So fuck you, you uninspired, illiterate, twaddle-spouting, onion-eyed, hagfish-sistered, shart-shooting whale’s offal. Fuck you and the dog you rode in on.

NHSparky

He didn’t just screw the pooch. He burned his bridge, blew the shit up, and scattered the ashes to the wind after pissing on them.

In parlayance, sippy, ya’ll dun fucked up now…

MCPO NYC USN (Ret.)

Sippy I like you as a human being and all … but you are one dumb fucking fuck, fuck, fuck ass!

Have a nice day!

MCPO NYC USN (Ret.)

Jonn … push that FUCK YOU key… it is just below the INSERT key!

Hondo

I’m kinda wondering if Sippy has been reporting that Czech income on his tax returns. And if it’s independent contract work, I’m wondering if he’s ponying-up the requisite 15.3% of what he receives in FICA taxes.

It doesn’t matter if you’re being paid in a foreign account. You’re required to report income from foreign sources as taxable income – as well as whether or not you have foreign accounts.

By the way, Ex-PH2: Stalin didn’t create Czechoslovakia. That country dates to the post-World War I breakup of the Austria-Hungarian Empire. Stalin stole the Carpatho-Ukraine from Slovakia at the end of World War II.

NHSparky

I like you as a human being and all

I didn’t. Yes, the use of past tense is intentional.

He was a troll, obtuse, completely unwilling to listen to reason, couldn’t hold his own in an argument to save his sorry ass, and couldn’t admit when he was wrong–EVER.

Good riddance.

Twist

At least Jonn left sippy’s posts up so we all don’t look like we were talking to ourselves.

PintoNag

Ladies and Gentlemen, Insipid has BEEN EJECTED from the building!

(I’d actually pay a lot of money to get the chance to see Jonn do that in person. Wouldn’t it be grand?)

NHSparky

Only if sippy cried when Jonn called him a dickweed.

Ex-PH2

Sorry, Hondo, I went off the top of my head. You’re right – I forgot about the post-WWI redraw that changed that part of Europe.

And I spent HOURS reading “Paris: 1919”, too. Shame on me.

We could spend some time dunking Splinky in the cesspool, but it would be a waste of our time, which can be spent on more important things.