Highlighting Senate Vote on DC Gun Ban

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by Marlin, Mar 4, 2009.

  1. Marlin

    Marlin *TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor*

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    13,856
    Location:
    At SouthernMoss' side forever!
    [FONT=&quot]This article from Associated Press today might help soothe the Savage Beast within each of you.....[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot]Make no mistake, we are in dire straits but all may not be lost. [/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    [/FONT]
    Democrats show little appetite for gun control

    By JIM ABRAMS
    Associated Press
    March 4, 2009

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The National Rifle Association warned in a campaign ad that if Barack Obama were elected president he would try to take away hunters' guns and ammo. But with pro-gun Democrats a powerful force in Congress, it's already pretty clear there will be no messing with Americans' right to bear arms.

    Twenty-two Democrats, including Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, joined Republicans last week in a Senate vote to negate the District of Columbia's tough gun registration requirements and overturn its ban on rapid-fire semiautomatic weapons. More than 80 House Democrats voted for a similar measure last year. [emphasis is mine, Marlin]

    "It was a pleasant surprise, but it's not a huge surprise that elected officials are listening to their constituents," said Chris W. Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist.

    It's not certain that the gun measure, attached to a bill on D.C. voting rights, will be a part of the final version of that bill. House plans to take up the voting rights bill this week were postponed Tuesday as Democratic leaders struggled over how to handle the gun issue.

    But with six of 11 Democratic Senate freshmen -- from pro-gun states such as Alaska, Colorado, New Mexico and Virginia -- voting for the proposal last week, it was a clear sign of where Congress is heading on gun issues.

    "There has been a shift in thinking among Democrats in the last six to eight years, away from old ideas about gun control and limiting access to guns and toward ideas about how you actually reduce gun crime," said Matt Bennett of Third Way, a group of moderate Democrats active on gun control issues.

    That shift has been frustrating for lawmakers who have long decried the NRA's ability to block gun control legislation.

    "We do not debate guns around here much anymore," said the Senate's no. 2 Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois, during debate on the D.C. gun amendment. "Basically, we reached a point where there are not many people who will stick their political necks out to vote for sensible gun control -- too big a hassle."

    A case in point is new Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand, a steadfast gun rights advocate when she represented a pro-gun, Republican-leaning district in upstate New York. Her appointment to succeed Hillary Clinton as New York's junior senator drew protests from gun-control Democrats, but after she voted against the D.C. gun amendment Republicans accused her of abandoning her principles for political expediency.

    Gillibrand's spokesman, Matt Canter, said the senator supports Second Amendment rights. But she also believes that local governments have the right to put legitimate limits on firearms and that law enforcement must have the tools to protect the public from gun violence, he said.

    A major turning point came last June, when the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 vote overturning D.C.'s ban on handgun possession, confirmed that the Second Amendment gives private citizens the right to bear arms.

    Gun control advocates were consoled that the decision also specifies that gun rights are not open-ended, that government can impose some restrictions in the public interest.

    With the court ruling, the argument that gun control will lead to gun bans no longer applies, said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "The slippery slope doesn't go anywhere anymore, and I think people realize that."

    For the time being, any gun-related legislation will be incremental. Helmke's group is urging the Obama administration to overturn a rule imposed in the last days of the Bush administration allowing people to carry concealed, loaded weapons in most national parks.

    There will also be a push to repeal the so-called Tiahrt amendment, named after Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., that limits the authority of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to disclose gun-trace data to the public and requires that certain records submitted to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System be destroyed after 24 hours.

    Both the Third Way's Bennett and Helmke said it may take another major gun crime, like the shootings at Columbine High School or Virginia Tech, to get Congress to act on more ambitious gun control initiatives.

    Those include overturning a law enacted in 2005 that denies gun crime victims the right to sue firearms manufacturers and dealers for damages.

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said she plans to push legislation to reinstate a federal ban on some assault weapons that became law during the Clinton administration in 1994 but expired under the Bush administration in 2004. Another long-term goal is requiring that all gun shows conduct background checks before selling firearms.

    The NRA's Cox said his group is gearing up to fight a new assault weapons ban, noting that Obama supports one and that Attorney General Eric Holder recently linked the proliferation of military-style weapons to the violence along the Mexican border. "It's laughable if it wasn't so serious to suggest that diminishing the Second Amendment will positively impact the situation down in Mexico," Cox said.

    But he said the NRA is also prepared to work with Democrats, as it did in 2007 in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, to pass legislation making it easier to flag prospective gun buyers with a history of mental problems.

    © 2009 Associated Press
  2. SaddleSarge

    SaddleSarge New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,025
    But, the press, maybe via the politicians, continue to make commentary within the news like this idiot from AP did:
    They've been called on the carpet for calling them "automatic," so it's "rapid-fire?"

    My fear is that these reports will be read by some and they will think that we are out of the woods. This may be just that ploy by democraps who have proven they have no real timetable as long as they accomplish their goal, along with the U.N. of that of disarmament.

    Hold close your friends. Hold your enemies even closer.
  3. AL MOUNT

    AL MOUNT Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,321
    Location:
    Cleaning my Thompson in The Foothills of the Ozark


    A sophomoric & moronic attempt by the AP reporter

    to make them sound more dangerous to the other idiot liberals :mad: Grrrrrrrrr


    NO... I'm not done ranting.... :rolleyes:
  4. Teejay9

    Teejay9 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,257
    Location:
    Southwest Corner of the US, "Where no stinking fen
    Well, at least it's not the rabid, foaming at the mouth cr@p we usually get from this ilk. The "rapid fire semi-automatics" is par for the course with these idiots. Glad to see Feinsteins' still plugging away. Boy, what a Senator! Not a word about Chuck the Shmuck. That seems odd. TJ
  5. 22WRF

    22WRF Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,575
    Location:
    Pea Ridge, FL
    Ya want a see my rapid fire revolver? :)
  6. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Yep, they are praying for some psycho to go off the deep end for the sole purpose of being able to get air time and scream their fear mongering crap! These people have NO interest in actually preventing and addressing crime, they want control...total control!
  7. Marlin T

    Marlin T Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,892
    Location:
    New Mexico
    I think this article is pretty misleading.

    This part of the bill was attached to the vote for senators for DC right?

    I believe this was intentionally attached by the (R)s so that the bill would not pass, or would be pulled off the floor.

    The dems were put in a bad spot, as well as the republicans.

    For the dems; what did they want more, more votes in the senate that were guaranteed dem votes forever, and then settle with supporting the 2nd amendment? Or vote their hearts and vote against the bill because they would be supporting the second amendment. I mean really, look at the odds of that many dems supporting the 2nd, come on. Mathematically impossible or at least very improbable.

    The republicans are hopefully in a better position. However, that position would require them to rely that SCOTUS would do the right thing and overrule the ‘DC gets votes’ because it isn’t a state. I think we saw that with the McCain Feingold deal right? Didn’t work out did it.

    If this bill wasn’t attached to the DC voters gizmo, I would lay the odds that maybe out of those 22 dems, their might have been 2 or 3 dems that would have voted for it.

    I just have to point out again from the last line of the story.

    “But he said the NRA is also prepared to work with Democrats, as it did in 2007 in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, to pass legislation making it easier to flag prospective gun buyers with a history of mental problems.”

    Great, the NRA is more than willing to subvert our rights for more “Common Sense” gun laws, great.
    So how many Iraq and other vets lost their second amendment rights because of the NRA? The NRA should adopt the new phrase, “Change you can believe in.”
  8. JDS

    JDS Former Guest

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    151
    If one wants to reduce the middle-class tax burden, improve health care, lessen the future cost of environmental difficulties, and rescue the capitalist system from utter collapse.........then getting a few people worked up about a relatively unimportant and irrelevant issue isn't a good way to go about it.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Serious Argument At Home? Well The Senate Wants Cops To Seize Your Guns While They're There Jul 30, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum NJ Senate Committee Passes .22 Rifle Ban, Magazine Ban By 3 to 2 Vote May 7, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Idaho : Bill to punish gun-seizing cops passes with full senate support Feb 20, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Illinois Senate Panel OKs Ban On High-Capacity Ammo Clips May 21, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Senate Gun Bill May 9, 2013

Share This Page