Senate (Toomey-Manchin Amend.) Gun Bill Has been...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Great news. Enjoy it for a minute, but don't let up.
Continue to support the NRA and stay in contact with representatives at the least inkling of a gun control bill.
We can't get complacent.
 
Aides hint at "executive action" being taken to respond to what he feels most Americans desire.

We've went over this before. Executive action cannot make new laws. He can't just decide to institute universal background checks or assault weapons bans.
 
Funny CoRoMo. No Wally worlds in my neck of the woods have any of consequence.

McCain voted for the amendment. Feinstein is speaking now. She needs to get here facts straight if she wants to fight crime.

I just saw that Reid had voted "No" to the background check amendment. This corrects what I just posted.
 
Thanks for the CSPAN link, I've been listening to the proceedings. They are now voting on the universal carry amendment. Schumer is such a tool, his emotionally based plea against the amendment was rife with ridiculous falsehoods... Something about universal carry law giving weapons to criminals...

:rolleyes:
 
So I'm confused about proceedings. The Cornyn amendment proposes reciprocal carry. Why bother trying to add this very pro-gun amendment into a bill that is overall anti?
 
Let freedom ring my friends!

Now, that's one battle. We have a long way to go, and when this nonsense dies down again, let's put the pressure on our reps to push something we want.
 
But what's this I read about Reid voting NO so as to have the ability to bring it up again?
 
So I'm confused about proceedings. The Cornyn amendment proposes reciprocal carry. Why bother trying to add this very pro-gun amendment into a bill that is overall anti?
Poison pill.

On the off chance it all passed any anti-gunner that voted yea for the overall bill would have to own allowing Texans and Kansans carry on the streets of New York and San Francisco. The very prospect of it terrifies them.
 
But what's this I read about Reid voting NO so as to have the ability to bring it up again?
I'm trying to find the reference to the rules, but it has something to do with a motion to reconsider being raised by someone from the losing side.

Matt
 
Bloomers whinning about SPECIAL INTEREST groups killing it, what the heck does he consider himself and the slugs he organized?
 
We have to keep the pressure up through 2014. This, I fear, is only the beginning.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top