Senate rejects gun control bills
Democrats and Republicans proposed four dueling gun control bills in the Senate yesterday, a week after the worst terrorist attack in this country since 9-11-2001, you know, because they have to act like they’re doing something – anything. Politico says that the Democrats didn’t want to pass anything anyway – they need issues for November;
Democrats made it clear they want to make it as painful for Republicans to oppose their gun amendments, whether through a flood of advocacy calls to their Senate offices or at the ballot box in November.
“Some of this is going to turn into an electoral operation,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who led the Senate Democrats’ nearly 15-hour gun filibuster last week, said an interview Monday. “I’m going to be turning my attention to the November election. I’m going to take some of my energy and help make sure that people who cast the wrong vote don’t come” back to the Senate.
That’s what Democrats do best – create issues without any real solutions.
One of the bills was just a rehash of the Feinstein bill that failed in 2013 after the last tragedy, according to Gabe Malor at The Federalist;
The Democratic proposals included Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s bill linking a terrorism watch list to a gun sales ban. On the Republican side, Sen. John Cornyn also offered legislation that would link a terrorism watch list to a gun sales ban, but his version added due process protections for Americans who are put on the list. The other two proposals expanded the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, although the Republican version did not go as far as the Democratic version.
Yeah, who needs due process? Just add the plebs to the list willy-nilly and let the chips fall where they may. Gabriel echoes Politico;
Rather than agree to the incremental gun control measures Republicans proposed, the Democrats chose to pass no gun control legislation at all. At some point after loudly demanding legislation for more than a week, Senate Democrats decided it would be better for their reelection prospects that no gun control bills pass the Senate during the election season. Their decision was hypocritical, unprincipled, and pure politics.
When it was all said and done, Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat who has been crying crocodile tears since Sandy Hook, told the Washington Post that “We’ve got to make this clear, constant case that Republicans have decided to sell weapons to ISIS.” You know, as opposed to Democrats who give free weapons to ISIS and Mexican drug cartels. It seems to me that someone who calls themselves “liberals” would be in favor of due process restraints on the government. Maybe that’s just me, though. I expect words to mean things. Stupid, I know.
Chuck Grassley proposed a bill to expand resources to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System – the most broken part of the background checks, the reason that most of the mass shooters of the last few years were able to legally buy guns – but according to Politico; “It also was blocked in the Senate, 53-47, rejected by nearly all Democrats”.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
But the Dems got what they wanted: a campaign talking point. Lie to the People about what really happened and tag the Republicans and Trump as evil SOBs who don’t want to stop murder.
It makes the dems’ real motives and priorities pretty clear, doesn’t it? “Working Man’s Party” my ass.
The DNC has not worked in the interest of the working class since Bill Clinton’s coup taking control over the DNC and selling it out to the finance regime in the 90s.
The party does not actually support any of the pro-working class agenda they spout in speeches.
Shit, I just realized who I responded to.
Disregard that post. I have no desire to get in any unnecessary discussions with you.
y’all both need to grow up. Whine, whine, whine…
Because you were actually on the right track for once? But good job proving that you’re still an asswipe.
If you don’t want a discussion, don’t post here. It’s really simple.
Falls down laughing, pointing at the idjit!
Grow the hide of a rhino, and the claws and teeth of a sabertooth, and hang in there. If I can hang with this bunch — so can you!
That one was pretty bizarre even for you, Lars. It was like leaving Berkeley and entering the Twilight Zone…
Headline: Democrats block funding for National Background Checks.
I’ll hold my breath until that one shows up.
As disjointed as the Republicans are at the moment I doubt they’ll take advantage of this as well as the Democrats will.
The Republicans are terrible at stating the obvious at times and it’s cost them over the years. The best way to remain the minority party across the nation is to continue to hammer away at each other while the Democrats solidify behind Clinton.
Nothing says “Losers” better than a divided party with a lot of high profile members stating how much they dislike the candidate that a majority of their party electorate voted for during the primary season. Paul Ryan and company probably wish they had a Super Delegate process like the Democrats so they can avoid the will of the people.
The major election problem for the Republicans for 25 years is that they let the Democrats dictate the talking points. As Bobo says above, the Dems voted against measures, after previously saying essentially “any measures, even if ineffective, are better than none,” The forgot to mention “well, only if they are OUR measures” – the legislative equivalent of ‘no Irish need apply.’ But the press and the Dems will exploit this all the way to the polls, blaming Republicans, and the GOP will not do jack to protest.
The Dems choose the topics, they lead the discussion, and the Repubs do nothing but react. And they wonder why they lose elections.
I have two measures that everyone should agree with.
Eliminate background checks. All the mass murderers in the US since forever bought their weapons from legal dealers and passed background checks. Since they are not filtering out bad guys, why bother?
Repeal most of the 1934 NFA. When was the last time that someone was shot in the US with a suppressed weapon or a machine gun or a short-barrelled rifle – shot, let alone killed? If you shoot at someone with a sawed-off-shotgun you can be charged with assault, manslaughter, or murder. Who the heck cares – or, to put it another way, why is it important – if you used a shotgun?
I think that we should leave active the parts about grenades and mortars and artillery but why have useless laws that don’t do anything except provide another line on a statement of charges?
Why does Congress only pass new laws? Why not get rid of useless laws?
You’re not paying attention. Most of the mass shooters would have popped hot on the NICS check if the local police had updated the database regularly.
One of the biggest problems is that NICS isn’t updated properly. Lets try fixing that before we announce the whole thing is worthless, eh?
I’m not trying to be disagreeable but can you provide a couple of examples?
For example, the kids at Columbine in Denver bought via a straw purchase. That lady was legal. Her crime was being a straw purchaser not that she would have popped hot at NICS.
IIRC the Denver theater shooter was seeing a shrink but had not been judged incompetent or whatever it took to fail a BG check.
Again, IIRC, same with the Orlando shooter and the Georgia shooter.
Help me out here.
OK, the Orlando shooter was not in NICS despite two terror investigations, not recorded. Virginia Tech was not in NICS despite reportable mental issues. The San Bernadino shooters were not in NICS despite pretty obviously Islamist ties. In so many cases, after the fact info has come out which should have prevented a direct purchase, but was not reported or acted upon.
Straw purchasers are another item – it’s already an illegal act at that point. About the only thing you can do with it are to make penalties harsher, like amending the law to make the straw buyer equally guilty of the same crimes as the shooter.
I’m not sorry but I have a hangup about due process. In order for the Orlando shooter to pop hot on NICS under the current laws, something like a “no buy list” would had to have happened – something without due process. re: GATech, “reportable” has that nasty due process issue again. There were lots of indicators but nobody wanted to make a federal case out of it. That was 1 in a million – or more like 32 in a million – but people rarely die from statistics but a 9 mm bullet is a different thing. For the purposes of discussion, I am taking the position that NICS could work but it doesn’t. After events like Orlando and the others the gun control community frequently demands more background checks and the gun rights community usually says something like, well it didn’t matter in this case. That is the wrong answer. I think that, in most cases, we all agree that he got a background check and he passed. I submit, expanding the existing system to private sales (where people will actually follow the law, not those other cases where there won’t be a BG check don’t matter) isn’t going to change the picture. If background checks are the solution then people (teachers, doctors, lawyers, Indian chiefs, etc) have to report suspicions and then either we have a mental examination and a court hearing or we forget about due process. I am just a dickweed from the sticks but I don’t have much confidence in the psychiatric profession – too many liberals and too much voodoo for me. So we have a system that relies on reporting that doesn’t happen so the system doesn’t work. From my personal perspective, I dislike government systems that don’t work so for the purpose of discussion I say let’s toss it. On the other hand, right now liberals are happy that NICS prevents the liberal equivalent of Revelations – let ’em live in their dreams. I don’t have a better solution that is tolerable and Constitutional. The current situation is not sustainable. Something… Read more »
That is because the only thing the Reps believe in anymore is money and power, and those are lousy talking points.
Everytime Democrats pimp out gun control measures, it invariably comes back and bites them square in the ass.
1994 mean anything to you assholes? 2016 won’t be any different, but you folks go ahead and pick that as the hill you want to die on.
That’s why they’re not passing bills right now. They want the sound & fury so they and their minions can pummel the GOP in the media.
I don’t know how many times I’ve seen someone on FB bitch about “the conservatives” for letting terrorists to buy guns when they’re on an FBI watch list. There’s so much wrong with that claim it’s pathetic, but that’s how the “debate” is being framed.
Meanwhile, Barry holds breath, stamps foot.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/21/white-house-obama-profoundly-frustrated-ready-executive-action-guns/
Looks like they are going to expand state surveillance powers.
This surprises you?
No. But annoys me.
I think the logic of expanding surveillance powers given that we are already have the largest and most pervasive surveillance state in human history is inconsistent with the logic of a free society.
So this week;
Senate looks to be expanding surveillance powers.
The second Amendment was death a blow with the supreme court letting stand a state ban on assault weapons which signal other jurisdictions are free to implement similar bans.
Supreme court lower the threshold for admissibility of evidence derived from unlawful stops and unlawful searches.
This week both presumptive nominees have called for both more control over internet communication and more domestic surveillance power.
And this board is still largely concerned about communists.
*dealt a blow. Not “death blow”.
Lars, a moron is someone with diminished capacity but a mental age of 7 or greater. Don’t be a moron. You made an outrageous statement about communists and we pummeled you for it. Speaking for myself, I don’t think that I am a 1-trick pony – I care about other stuff. If you want to be an ass, I give you leave. If you want to have an intelligent discussion, let’s do that.
I think that “given that we are already have the largest and most pervasive surveillance state in human history” is hyperbole. If oppression is the measure, East Germany was much worse and the current UK government has the Official Secrets Act and more cameras per square foot than anyone. The NSA may watch everything electronic but I cannot see any overt oppressive affect from it. If the NSA is all powerful then how come they don’t track every drug dealer by their phones and have the police pick them up?
Just because the Supreme Court didn’t grant cert for those assault weapon ban challenges doesn’t mean that they cannot grant it in the future. Assault weapon bans are state laws, they can be overturned by courts and made null and void by future legislatures. SCOTUS can be very fussy about the cases it takes.
Read the Volokh Conspiracy for interesting stuff about things like the admissibility findings and qualified immunity. Sometimes you’re the dog and sometimes you’re the hydrant. The devil is in the details.
I think that it would be best if the US Government stopped all domestic surveillance but the courts have said that they don’t have to. I’m not that confident that I am right and time may change the rules.
“We’ve got to make this clear, constant case that Republicans have decided to sell weapons to ISIS.” – Murphy.
So Chris Murphy thinks it’s okay to lie his ass off to get his way? Are there billboards where we can get this message across that he’s nothing but a lying crapweasel?
The end justifies the means…said and still say many powerful people.
Has anyone else noticed the earthquake pre-shock in the LGBT community?
A rainbow-Gadsden-shootBack flag, all over San Francisco. And it is catching on more broadly
Folks, that is an earthquake in the making. If that trend holds, 2020 is going to be a very, very interesting election.
There is about to be a seismic shift in our political economy.
Both parties are splitting/collapsing.
And people are increasingly choosing sides that are not controlled by party politics.
11B-Mailclerk, I think they’ve quickly learned that you can only be passive for so long without suffering the consequences of that, and I have no issues with that.
This kind of thing is not just going to happen at gay bars. It can happen, as we’ve been reminded by Jonn several times, at any crowded public facility.
That message should be spread everywhere by everyone who wants to stop and/or survive something like the Orlando shooting.
As someone here so eloquently put it;
“Being a pacifist is only okay when your life isn’t in danger.”
I don’t remember who and I wish I could claim it for myself.
Cheers.
WHAT THE fuckety-fuck-fucking moldy Swamp Donkey shit are more laws gonna be when they DO NOT enforce the existing laws worth a moldy roach shit?
Bingo! API wins this round of 20 Questions!
The enemies of freedom are relentless in their attempts and this is a great example of legislation to negate the US Constitution attached to a problem it doesn’t address. Democrats have always had a bad history regarding civil rights and this is more of the same.