Playing chicken...

and Congress just flinched to the NRA.

In before the lock!

what happened? I haven't been following that story

Gun control bill failed.

Ah. also in before lock

From what I understand, the gun lobby more or less put their foot down and made it very clear anybody voting for gun control would not get re elected. Biden's sad lost puppy with cancer and aids face reflects this.

Here's another:

Kenny_McCormic wrote: From what I understand, the gun lobby more or less put their foot down and made it very clear anybody voting for gun control would not get re elected. Biden's sad lost puppy with cancer and aids face reflects this.

Cuomo is going to have a fun time next November after the SAFE act.

In other news, we missed out on nationwide reciprocity of carry licenses by a whopping 3 votes.....I would almost trade that off for a non-enforcable "universal" background check law too.

Also, I 'd at the lie of "The law stated a registration couldn't occur" when thats been on the books since '86. I don't want to see that get "moved" to anything new, as it truly is one of the things stopping registration(it would, or at least should, nullify the ban on new production FA)

Unfortunately, I do see this as resorting to name calling and the general political BS.......so IBTL?

I should be sad about this?

carguy123 wrote: I should be sad about this?

Probably not about the background check thing........I am sad about not having 50 state reciprocity though.

yamaha wrote:

carguy123 wrote: I should be sad about this?

Probably not about the background check thing........I am sad about not having 50 state reciprocity though.

That's the big loss in this whole thing. Though now that it has been put on the table it's possible it might get it's own bill. Provided of course that they can ram it through without NY crying that it's running afoul of their recent "ruling". That's going to see SCOTUS at some point or another though.

I didn't figure it the control thing would go anywhere, glad to see at least a few people have some sense. Toomey might get some blowback from this for even bringing it to the table (trying to look up how he voted now), which sort of sucks because I liked everything else about him.

Edit: Yea he voted for it. Guess he's going to be a one term Senator because I doubt the pro-gun lobby will let that drop ever.

The bill had virtually no chance of making it through the house either due to the way that it has been gerrymandered, so it just failed early. Left slanted columnists are already getting all sensationalist about it which amuses me.

yamaha wrote:

carguy123 wrote: I should be sad about this?

Probably not about the background check thing........I am sad about not having 50 state reciprocity though.

I am sad about that myself. So freakin close.

So, they voted to keep the 2nd Amendment? How gracious of them. It's not like they all took an oath to support and defend the Constitution or anything...ok, wait....all 100 of them did.

The funniest part was having to hear a certain someone call out others for lying. That's too funny.

Kenny_McCormic wrote: From what I understand, the gun lobby more or less put their foot down and made it very clear anybody voting for gun control would not get re elected. Biden's sad lost puppy with cancer and aids face reflects this.

You mean politicians can be bought!? Even my moral compass, Harry Reid!?

I'm a little disappointed we're not stringing up a pair of Senators in GA, but what the hell do you expect from politicians?

If I understand this correctly, it was shot down by the Senate. Isn't the Senate made up of mostly people on Obama's side. He can't get his own stuff past his own people?

914Driver wrote: If I understand this correctly, it was shot down by the Senate. Isn't the Senate made up of mostly people on Obama's side. He can't get his own stuff past his own people?

Democrats in the South all have guns. They support Obama, just don't even think about regulating their guns.

914Driver wrote: If I understand this correctly, it was shot down by the Senate. Isn't the Senate made up of mostly people on Obama's side. He can't get his own stuff past his own people?

I think it goes a little something like this - "Hey guys, I know this E36 M3 is half baked and not really productive, but I'll run it up the pole and you stay home that day, that way it looks like we did something and then later... we can blame the other guys for blocking it. Profit!"

I am a little annoyed at the reciprocity thing. The penalties are really steep for crossing an arbitrary line (like 10yrs in prison) for something that is perfectly legal in other places in the same berkeleying country. Imagine if they did that with driver's licenses.

914Driver wrote: If I understand this correctly, it was shot down by the Senate. Isn't the Senate made up of mostly people on Obama's side. He can't get his own stuff past his own people?

In reply to 914Driver:

1. no. it is pretty much even dems, vs repubs. 53 to 45 (and 2 independents) that is not control, as 51% is not enough to pass anything

2. a minority was against it: 54 to 46. but 54% is not enough to pass. (yep, more than just the dems were in favor of the new law)

3. 86% of americans are for the background checks (according to a poll on CNN, and most others get close to the same results). so 46% of the senate was voting for 14% of the people. (irrelevant of anyone's personal stand on things, this is the numbers)

4. just because people are in the same party does not make them "people to be controlled". that is the problem with this country.. instead of people doing what is right for the people, they go "with their party." and arbitrary stance, if you ask me.

I am fairly pro-gun but I am kinda confused as to why not having universal background checks is a good thing...

In reply to 93EXCivic:

I am in your boat, on the first part, and add some conjecture to the second: people hear ALL over that background checks will do nothing. because the baddies will just buy them on the black market, and they also hear that background checks will lead to registering your guns. and that registering will lead to the gov't taking them away.

when it comes down to it, background checks will lead to slowed gun sales. slowed sales means less money in the pockets of the gun makers.

AS far as I am concerned background checks, and registrations will let people KEEP their guns. without it, no-one knows who has what...and the only thing those that are afraid of crazies with guns can do it is just outright ban the guns. with background checks, and registrations people will now who has what (or at least have the illusion of it) and feel safer.

everything in politics (this especially) is no longer about what is going on. it is about hearsay and finding out the truth. it has become a travesty and other countries laugh at how our people vote one way or the other based on lies, and our politicians create laws based on who pays them the most.

T.J. wrote: So, they voted to keep the 2nd Amendment? How gracious of them. It's not like they all took an oath to support and defend the Constitution or anything...ok, wait....all 100 of them did. The funniest part was having to hear a certain someone call out others for lying. That's too funny.

So I expect you to stand at the front of the crowd stopping the new voting registration acts in various states, since they violate the 19th, 24th, and 26th Amenments for voting.

And you should also be happy that the reciprocity didn't pass, since that would, by the same measure, violate the 14th Amendment for states rights.

I find it amusing how people stand up in horror of violating one right, but are happy to apply laws to violate the rights for others in different aspects. Shocking.

I am taking the bait

For a rather large percentage of gun sales, there are background checks, on the internet, in gun shows, etc.. Most gun crimes are from gangs, most gangs have a squecky clean guy to make straw purchases, which are already illegal. There is a lot of grey and heresay, but the background checks in this bill would have created a database and all of the big brotherness that can go along with that would likely have followed.

It would not have solved anything, but would have made it harder for me to guy a gun and more expensive to boot and I'd get on a list.

As pro-gun as I am I am also very pro-constitution. If Cali wants to limit gun sales or ownership, that is their prerogative per the tenth amendment. Therefore, if they choose to outlaw concealed carry, they can. If they do, they should be able to do this within their borders, for any state's citizens. Therefore, as nice and easy as it would be to have common gun laws and concealed carry permits, I don't agree with that law either.

alfadriver wrote: And you should also be happy that the reciprocity didn't pass, since that would, by the same measure, violate the 14th Amendment for states rights. I find it amusing how people stand up in horror of violating one right, but are happy to apply laws to violate the rights for others in different aspects. Shocking.

You mean tenth. The fourteenth is the citizenship thing.

And hey, I agreed with you. On politics. WOW!

In reply to alfadriver:

we probably don't want to get started on amendment violations, as the wording of the second amendment ACTUALLY says it is for the military... because back then you had to bring your own gun. and nowadays I you aren't allowed to bring your own guns, without getting special permission, and lots of paperwork.

that any politician saying his legislative decisions are religious based is against the first amendment...

I could go on. but the constitution is not what this about. it is about people fearing what is told to them, by others on facebook... and facebook is never wrong.

alfadriver wrote:

T.J. wrote: So, they voted to keep the 2nd Amendment? How gracious of them. It's not like they all took an oath to support and defend the Constitution or anything...ok, wait....all 100 of them did. The funniest part was having to hear a certain someone call out others for lying. That's too funny.

So I expect you to stand at the front of the crowd stopping the new voting registration acts in various states, since they violate the 19th, 24th, and 26th Amenments for voting. And you should also be happy that the reciprocity didn't pass, since that would, by the same measure, violate the 14th Amendment for states rights. I find it amusing how people stand up in horror of violating one right, but are happy to apply laws to violate the rights for others in different aspects. Shocking.

+1