Weapons Ban Lacks Votes to Pass Senate

vamo said:

Keep in mind it takes 60 not 51 votes nowadays to get something through the senate.

Click to expand...

Yea, Harry R. and his punks are trying to get that changed to a simple majority??

They already did their filibuster reform bill and it passed. You can still filibuster with 60 votes; however you can no longer filibuster the motion to proceed (one chance instead of two to filibuster).

I suspect most of the mind-changing was based on keeping their seat, not principle. Very few politicians will stick with principles if it costs them their seat. That means it can change back if the tides sway in their favor, politically.

Re election is a wonderful thing.

Doesn't mean they won't try to do it again down the road.

Term limits even better

fdashes said:

Term limits even better

Click to expand...

Term Limits yea vote them out.

I agree. Keep the pressure on. There are MANY more bills than just that garbage proposed by Feinstein. This one https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/113/x101 Has a Lot of support votes, because hey, "It's common sense". Need people to oppose this just as much, or more. All they need to do is win with ONE of these pos bills.

Term limits even better

Click to expand...

No. A term-limited officeholder is a lame duck, meaning he can do anything he darn well pleases without fear of retaliation from the voters. (Exactly the position Obama is in, in his second term.) Gun owners would have no clout with such people.

they never had the votes ! the drive-by media was just assumeing if they had a "D" after there name that they would be for a gun ban ,
there are 11 Democrat senators with "A" and "B" rateings from the NRA Harry R got a "B" from the NRA ! the far left MSNBC ran a pole in favor of a AWB 89% were not in favor of it , you can see it on there web site , I'd bet they will never air it !
but don't sleep too tight , they will fine another way to screw with us , more back ground checks , permits, fees, ect ect ,

as for a ban , not going to happen, in 2010, after the dems, got there clock cleaned out , the NRA, said "We now have the most pro-gun house and senate, in 50 years,

We are in an endurance race, a war of attrition. As soon as we go to sleep, something will pass, guaranteed. It's going to be a looong four years.. or more.

Things to look out for: magazine restrictions, Universal Background Check(prelude to Universal registration), making F2F transfers a felony.

Feinstein's Bill will be broken up and attempts will be made to introduce and pass the provisions individually, over time.

Now the politicking begins.

Click to expand...

Yes. Clinton's 1994 ban didn't have the votes to pass either....until the arm twisting was done.

AlexanderA said:

No. A term-limited officeholder is a lame duck, meaning he can do anything he darn well pleases without fear of retaliation from the voters. (Exactly the position Obama is in, in his second term.) Gun owners would have no clout with such people.

Click to expand...

Then treat the replacement as the person who voted.

Feinstein new her bill would never have the chance of day light.

It was intentionally designed to allow follow-on bills to be called "Moderate" and "Bi-partisan".

Term limits are already in place, but we call them elections.

I also don't think this will blow over without wounding at best. It might, we'll have to see. But we cannot, like a Revolutionary War militia, return home to our crops because we have not spotted the British in line yet. This is precisely the time they WANT us to think it will blow over. The panic started and has subsided a bit - not much, but a bit - because you cannot realistically maintain a constant state of alert. So, the ant bed got kicked and we ran about for a while. The ants are slowing. Perhaps that was all there was too it, but we cannot afford to relax now. We have to keep the pressure up as this is but a lull in the fighting. Pieces are being moved about, deals being made.

We cannot afford another Corn Husker Compromise. We have to keep going on this one.

The articles I'm reading seem to indicate they realize an AWB will not be forthcoming. But in all those same articles they feel confident they can get a "high cap" mag ban. We've got to make extremely clear to them that we are against them banning ANYTHING, rifle, pistol, shotgun or magazine. We won't accept a ban on anything.

Why don't they get the message? It's pretty easy to understand: Go after the bad guys. Leave us alone.

I agree. Feinstein's AWB was never expected to pass, it was an effort to shock us and desensitize us to follow up legislation such as Magazine Bans, Mandatory Universal Background Checks and Registration.

Makes all of the "It's a cookbook! We've got to 'compromise'!" hysteria look even more foolish.

I emailed my Congressman a couple of weeks ago.

The real fight will be magazine capacity. This is one they cannot be allowed to win, what happened in NY and is being proposed in MA shows clearly, without a doubt, that the anti-gunners will not always be happy with a 10rd mag limit. 7 rounds will be the next step for the gun grabbers.

zenner22 said:

The articles I'm reading seem to indicate they realize an AWB will not be forthcoming. But in all those same articles they feel confident they can get a "high cap" mag ban. We've got to make extremely clear to them that we are against them banning ANYTHING, rifle, pistol, shotgun or magazine. We won't accept a ban on anything.

Why don't they get the message? It's pretty easy to understand: Go after the bad guys. Leave us alone.

Click to expand...

Why don't they get the message? Oh, that's easy. 'Cause they're politicians!

We can't let up on the letter writing and emails. Whenever the majority needs a few votes here and a few votes there, they start attaching attractive pork, uh, I mean, "riders" to the original bill to make it more attractive.

Don't like my assault weapons ban, Senator? Maybe you'll like it more if there's 300 million for 'infrastructure upgrades' for your state added to the bill! That is what we need to watch out for now.

Don't let your guard down one bit, folks! If anti-gunners are willing to lie to and deceive American laymen about the efficacy of gun control, who are we to believe that they WON'T lie to us? Any battle is full of deception.

This could be a tactic by Bloomberg to let us (his enemy) let our guard down and sleep on the job. I'm not buying it for a second, and I'll maintain political pressure.

This news means nothing. The only news that will mean anything is the news that says the vote happened and there weren't enough in favor.

This could be a tactic by Bloomberg to let us (his enemy) let our guard down and sleep on the job. I'm not buying it for a second, and I'll maintain political pressure.

Click to expand...

Political pressure needs to be maintained, no debate about that.

However, let's just all keep a little perspective on hand when we start talking about these people being sophisticated master manipulators. They aren't that smart, they aren't 10 feet tall (even if some of their wallets are ten feet tall), and they are showing themselves to be increasingly out of touch with modern American voters of all flavors when it comes to gun control.

We can defeat these people. I don't just mean we can block this round of legislation. I mean we can break them. Look at the general trajectory of concealed carry policies by state over the last 30-40 years. Look at the ubiquitousness of the AR and defensive handguns in most parts of this country. When was the last time national level mainstream politicians on either side were even willing to do more than pay lip service to the idea of gun control except when some tragedy provided a short opening? Look at the fact that while one side was screaming about outlawing guns after Sandy Hook, the other side was successfully advancing the idea of more guns being in schools as protection and potential remedy against lunatics.

Think about that last part -- what gun related mass shooting in the last 30 years has led to successful pushes at the local level and real debate at the state and national level about the value of armed civilians as a component of collective security for citizens and their children?

This fight is going to be nasty and hard, but not because I think Obama is determined to make anti-2A action his legacy but because I think the proliferation of post-9/11 and post-Obama gun sales and everything else that has happened since the '94 AWB has made the anti-2A movement's leadership aware that they are at, or approaching, a demographic tipping point where nothing but failure and marginalization yawns out in front of them. They will lash out -- and we need to push hard to ensure they don't succeed as the flail desperately -- but I don't see the weight of history of their side right now.