A Divided Senate Rejects Gun Curbs, Despite Orlando Massacre [W: 710] (1 Viewer)

[Beaudreaux]

A Divided Senate Rejects Gun Curbs, Despite Orlando Massacre | ABC NEWS

A Divided Senate Rejects Gun Curbs, Despite Orlando Massacre

By alan fram and mary clare jalonick, associated press

WASHINGTON — Jun 20, 2016, 6:21 PM ET

A divided Senate rejected rival plans to bolster the federal background check system and moved toward blocking other proposed curbs on guns Monday, eight days after the horror of Orlando's mass shooting intensified pressure on lawmakers to act but knotted them in election-year gridlock anyway — even over restricting firearms for terrorists.

Each party offered a proposal it said would keep terrorists from obtaining firearms and a second shoring up the existing system of background checks for gun purchases. With the Senate visitors' galleries unusually crowded for a Monday evening, lawmakers voted 53-47 for the Republican background check plan and 44-56 for the Democratic version — both short of the 60 needed to move ahead.

[...]

Just about as biased of an article title I've seen in recent history.

Who won, was the US Constitution, specifically Article V, as well as the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments - that's what was at stake folks, not guns. Who lost, were knee jerk reactions to oppress fundamental rights due to scary things happening.

 

[jonny5]

A Divided Senate Rejects Gun Curbs, Despite Orlando Massacre | ABC NEWS

And, where is your original comments to spur debate?

 

[Beaudreaux]

And, where is your original comments to spur debate?

Read the OP again.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Two down, actually 3 down now, 1 to go.

Feinstein's bill is up next. She wants to prohibit those on a watch list from buying a firearm without due process of law.

The party of civil rights my :bootyshake

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Just heard the last gun control bill was voted down.

 

[tres borrachos]

A Divided Senate Rejects Gun Curbs, Despite Orlando Massacre | ABC NEWS



Just about as biased of an article title I've seen in recent history.

Who won, was the US Constitution, specifically Article V, as well as the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments - that's what was at stake folks, not guns. Who lost, were knee jerk reactions to oppress fundamental rights due to scary things happening.

"Knee jerk reactions". That describes what was going on here to a tee.

 

[Beaudreaux]

"Knee jerk reactions". That describes what was going on here to a tee.

Here's the Roll Call Vote tallies: U.S. Senate: Roll Call Votes

 

[tres borrachos]

Here's the Roll Call Vote tallies: U.S. Senate: Roll Call Votes

From those roll calls it doesn't appear there is any truth to something posted elsewhere that my Senator (Kelly Ayotte) voted with the Dems. She went along strict party lines. Good. I was going to get worked up at her.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

"Knee jerk reactions". That describes what was going on here to a tee.

I call it "opportunity."

"You Never Want A Serious Crisis To Go To Waste"
Rahm Emanuel

 

[Beaudreaux]

From those roll calls it doesn't appear there is any truth to something posted elsewhere that my Senator (Kelly Ayotte) voted with the Dems. She went along strict party lines. Good. I was going to get worked up at her.

Don't breathe easy yet. The last vote hasn't been posted yet, and I think that she and at least two other Reps voted Yea on that one - it was the Feinstein amendment. (the one that was a 47-53 vote)

 

[Beaudreaux]

From those roll calls it doesn't appear there is any truth to something posted elsewhere that my Senator (Kelly Ayotte) voted with the Dems. She went along strict party lines. Good. I was going to get worked up at her.

Here it is, she voted Yea on the Feinstein amendment. U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote

 

[Bootlace]

The terrorist list provision was flat unconstitutional on its face. Even beyond that, if someone is such a threat to society that we can't trust them to buy a gun, WTF are they doing in society? Think about this, we have a terrorist watch list, by default admits we have terrorists and are trusting an alphabet agency with our safety. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[tres borrachos]

Here it is, she voted Yea on the Feinstein amendment. U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote

It's so at odds with her other votes today. Interesting.

I'll bet her phones'll be ringing off the hook tomorrow.

 

[Beaudreaux]

It's so at odds with her other votes today. Interesting.

I'll bet her phones'll be ringing off the hook tomorrow.

It better be ringing.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The terrorist list provision was flat unconstitutional on its face. Even beyond that, if someone is such a threat to society that we can't trust them to buy a gun, WTF are they doing in society? Think about this, we have a terrorist watch list, by default admits we have terrorists and are trusting an alphabet agency with our safety. What could possibly go wrong?

We do seem to trust that failing a BGC at a FFL dealer's shop will make them give up shopping for a gun (or two). Of course, they might have a friend or rellative (not yet on the bad guy liist) that would buy on their behalf and later claim that the guns were stolen. The idea that we must let known to be extremely dangerous folks roam freely among us such that we need a team of (8?) agents to see what they are up to is quite insane.

 

[Bootlace]

It's so at odds with her other votes today. Interesting.

I'll bet her phones'll be ringing off the hook tomorrow.

Post up her number. I'll call.

 

[tres borrachos]

Post up her number. I'll call.

(603) 622-7979

 

[chromium]

well half the senate hates the victims, so this doesn't surprise me

 

[Henrin]

well half the senate hates the victims, so this doesn't surprise me

:roll::doh

This has nothing to do with gays, but with constitutional rights like the right of the people to bear arms.

 

[Henrin]

Two down, actually 3 down now, 1 to go.

Feinstein's bill is up next. She wants to prohibit those on a watch list from buying a firearm without due process of law.

The party of civil rights my :bootyshake

Civil rights to liberals means things like forcing employers to employee someone, forced commerce, and suing people for not listening to requests.

 

[JoeTrumps]

well half the senate hates the victims, so this doesn't surprise me

More Dems voted with GOP than other way but whatever. why start acknowledging reality now, right?

 

[Linc]

More Dems voted with GOP than other way but whatever. why start acknowledging reality now, right?

Correction--More GOPs crossed over versus DEMs, 5 to 4.

Ayotte, Collins, Flake, and Gardner crossed once--Kirk all 4 times.

Tester, Heitkamp, and Manchin crossed once--Donnelly twice .

 

[Casper]

A Divided Senate Rejects Gun Curbs, Despite Orlando Massacre | ABC NEWS



Just about as biased of an article title I've seen in recent history.

Who won, was the US Constitution, specifically Article V, as well as the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments - that's what was at stake folks, not guns. Who lost, were knee jerk reactions to oppress fundamental rights due to scary things happening.

Glad they failed to pass. But it was far too close, so who knows what will happen next time. Hope for the Best and Prepare for the Worst.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Glad they failed to pass. But it was far too close, so who knows what will happen next time. Hope for the Best and Prepare for the Worst.

Already ordered a couple cases of rounds, since those will be on the banners radar before long - if they can't ban the gun, they will try to ban the ammo. I also ordered a new reloader and a bunch of supplies.

And, I'm no where near being a prepper.

 

[tres borrachos]

More Dems voted with GOP than other way but whatever. why start acknowledging reality now, right?

WTF? No. Wrong. Geezus, where in the hell do you get your news?

5 Republicans crossed over. 4 Democrats crossed over. 5 is still greater than 4.