The gun control bill has passed its first hurdle in the Senate. Democrats shut down a planned Republican filibuster by voting against it 68-31.
In a big victory for the Democrats, 16 Republicans crossed the aisle and voted with them. Two Democrats - Mark Begich (AL) and Mark Pryor (AR) - voted against the rest of their party.
The law under debate would "require background checks on all commercial gun sales and end the so-called "'gun show loophole,'" according to Politico. It would also make gun trafficking a federal crime and provide additional aid for school security. An assault weapons ban can be offered as an amendment.
Make popcorn and settle in for some high-stakes political theater. "Senators are expected to spend at least the next two weeks debating the gun bill," Politico reports.
I hope they will take time to read the small print. In Connecticut, their law was written in secret and rammed through under pressure from the traveling grieving parent lobbyists. http://jpfo.org/articles-assd03/korwin-ct-gun... It's never good news when politix.com tries to skew the outcomes of a poll by limiting the number of responses one can give.
Well nice to know our Senator voted against it being a democrat and all. Also Alaska intials are AK =]. Anyway it bad news none the less where are the bills of taking mental health precautions? Forgot what bill Senator Begich "told" me he was sponsoring but it was a bill that had to do with mental health services, no talks at all about that. Probably check website later so where it at in Congress. Probably just dead legislation no one talked about.
I don't see this as a BIG VICTORY, the Senate ran according to the rules, the democraps garnered sufficient votes to avoid a filibuster... SO? The stern "WARNING" from the prez is now nothing but an attempt to intimidate the Senate.
This doesn't assure that the bill will pass, only that it will be debated. If the bill does manage to go through the Senate, it still has to pass through the House and then be signed by da prez.
Even then it will face SCOTUS scrutiny.
But I'm SURE our corps of Anti Bill of Rights Zealots will be celebrating as if the Detroit Lions won the Super Bowl... I'm glad to see the debate going on, fiction is one of my favorite forms of entertainment and the Anti Bill of Rights cast of characters ALWAYS put on an entertaining show.... not much substance but tons of rhetoric delivered with zeal and commitment.
The senate needs to debate this issue and it is televised. We can watch the debates and make our own decisions regarding gun control. Good debate is healthy, when this moves to the floor for a vote, I will be watching closely and my votes will be heard in the next election. This is good for the country, we actually will know where every senator stands on gun control.
I'm wondering when someone from the left will say we have to pass the bill to see what's in it?
I say the republicans should say "ill vote to background checks if there are no records kept, it's not required for private sales from citizen to citizen, and all voters must undergo background checks and have valid state issued photo ID to vote". My guess if you threw the last one in there the leftists would scream.
Pretty much everyone is cautious on registration with any sense. Should a disaster like Katrina happen, revolt, etc. confiscation would be easy from gun owners. It happened after Katrina, it can happen again. And those folks still haven't had their guns returned, and how many years has that been?
@GvtMule I know they have to be free to voters. I find it fascinating the Republicans object if the government tries to feed hungry children but they'll whip out the checkbook in a heartbeat for free voter IDs.
Even if it passes through the senate it won't pass through the house. The bill would provide additional revenue for social security but the money has to come from somewhere. Where will this money come from. EXTRA TAXES on gun owners simply because they own guns
I don't know why the gun enthusiasts are up in arms about this. First, it is only right that it be debated and voted upon. The filibuster has got to go. Second, it is very unlikely to pass. I don't know why gun enthusiasts want politicians to "cheat" with a filibuster when they can most likely defeat the bill upon a vote. Third, if it does pass, there are very reasonable measures -- honestly, it's hard to see how a rational person would object.
Yeh, the Democrats really care about how people are dying... NOT! Liberals have one goal, taking our guns and it has nothing to do with our safety.
Do you Gun control fanatics care about how many children die each year from drowning? Why are you not making laws to prohibit swimming in rivers, lakes, ponds, oceans, or how about banning swimming pools deeper than two feet. That would save many lives right? Why not just ban any activity or any weapon that is capable of killing people.
We're talking very specifically about ways to stop random massacres from happening. As for the other issues? Actually people do care about them. For instance, why do you think most places have building regulations that require pools be properly fenced, for instance?
We're never going to have a perfect world but gun "enthusiasts" have got to stop being so egocentric. It's about public safety and it's reasonable for people to discuss and address that.
@Zazziness Hogwash!!!!!!!!!! The issues that should be at the top of the list are those who take the most lives!!!!!! Only political extremists would single out the gun that has only killed less than 400 people compared to issues where thousands die. Hogwash to your pure bias. Do you drink? Do you want big Government banning alcohol to save lives? That would save many thousand more lives than assault rifles. Do you have a clue?
@GvtMule That's a good question. Now turn it around and ask yourself why people are focused on stopping the massacres *before* they happen, if at all possible, and limiting their damage if they do happen. Ask yourself if people are unreasonable because they are sick and tired of classrooms being a slaughterhouse. You may disagree with some proposed solutions but unless you understand what it is people are trying to prevent and why it is important to them, you're not talking about the real issue.
To bad they didn't list the 16 Republicians since they listed the two Democrats who voted against it! What's up with that? Voted against and be named ... voted for it and get to hide in that little rat hole you crawled out of?
People are too lazy to actually look anything up. The 16 Republicans who voted to break the filibuster were Sens. Lamar Alexander, Kelly Ayotte, Richard M. Burr, Saxby Chambliss, Tom Coburn, Susan Collins, Bob Corker, Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham, Dean Heller, John Hoeven, Johnny Isakson, Mark S. Kirk, John McCain, Patrick J. Toomey and Roger Wicker.
Do they not know when to leave something well enough alone? There are already gun laws that are not being enforced. Try that first and stop wasting time. They have another fiscal dead line looming. Their trying to jump on this legislation while emotions are high from recent gun tragedies. They have now picked up a very bad habit of passing legislation without ever reading the whole thing and checking out what pork has been added that has nothing to do with the legislation on hand; which they don't know all about either because they didn't read it. It is bad policy to start passing legislation to look like they are doing something, they just don't know what. Just read what's written on top of the page? Ah yi yi!
Basically, were talking about running background checks on everyone who wants to buy a gun. No limitations on magazines, nothing currently in there regarding assault weapons, nothing that negatively impacts my ability to own and/or use a gun… unless I shouldn’t own one in the first place because I’m a Felon, have a history of domestic violence or mental illness that makes me dangerous to others.
So it basically comes down to every sale, private or not, will go through an FFL. The fee is $20 at the bare minimum, often times much, much higher. Can we not make this easier... and cheaper? Why can there not be a searchable database through which private sellers can personally run background checks? Have the seller responsible to whom she or he sells the firearm.