Can an AWB pass the US Senate

[dogrunner]

Regarding Manchin's commentary I'd add that I grew up in the very County he is from, and I personally know several of his very influential supporters. Be assured that IF he supports a gun control measure he WILL be looking for new employment next time around!

West Virginians took back their RTKBA by the addition of a State Constitutional Amendment in the 80's, fought the issue in the courts and won!........As I recall, the support for the addition of a RTKBA amendment to the State's Consitution was in the high 80th percentile! It's notable that the vote followed nearly 80 years of extremely repressive may issue licensing and regulation.

 

[Girodin]

Well let's hope that our friends in W. Virginia make that very clear to him. We need to do everything we can to encourage freedom loving people to make their voices heard and let the politicians on the fence know that they exist and how they feel.

 

[Ranger Roberts]

Here is a pretty comprehensive list of senators and how they'll likely vote on an awb.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/senate-assault-weapons-ban-newtown

 

[mljdeckard]

I very much agree with Girodin. They have WANTED this all along. They haven't DONE it because they don't have the votes. They now have about five more votes than they had a week ago, which is far from enough. They don't have the votes in the house. To get through the Senate, Harry Reid would have to let it onto the floor. I doubt he will. Despite other problems I have with him, his gun record is very consistent.

The fervor is at its peak right now. They have put Denny Crane in charge of a commission to get down to the bottom of this. He will come back in 4-6 months, make some recommendations, and nothing will happen. They will say they tried, and the republicans wouldn't let them.

 

[mljdeckard]

By the way, those Mother Jones numbers are beyond ridiculous. (They came from Mother Jones.)

 

[mljdeckard]

I should probably add, I am glad to live in a state where I can remind my reps what they need to do....but it's really not necessary. They already know, even our lone Democrat has been shock-collar conditioned to do the right thing on gun votes.

 

[Atbat82]

Be careful of Mother Jones. It's not exactly an unbiased site.

Also, Joe Lieberman has retired from the Senate. It won't matter too much as his replacement, Chris Murphy, is sure to support the measure as well. Interesting that Mother Jones counted them both...


Sent from my iPhone

 

[Girodin]

To get through the Senate, Harry Reid would have to let it onto the floor. I doubt he will.

You feel that way after the statements he has been making? He has been saying things like: “In the coming days and weeks we’ll engage in a meaningful conversation and proper debate about how to change laws and culture that allow this violence to continue to grow...And every idea should be on the table.’’ That is ambiguous enough that he isn't committing to favor an AWB or anything else but it is very disturbing rhetoric. I guess Arsenal didn't write him a big enough check. Or maybe he just feels the NV demographics are changing enough that he can too. He is definitely one to watch and a guy that constituents and the gun lobby should be focusing on.

I am glad to live in a state where I can remind my reps what they need to do....but it's really not necessary

Do not be so sure. Hatch is one the Republican Senators people are really worried about. He has announced already he will not seek election again (heck he may not even live long enough to do so). Hatch showed some openness to gun control measures after Columbine. Hatch was in fact the Senator (along with Herbert Kohl) that introduced the legislation requiring gun sellers to sell them with gun locks. A pointless measure the simply added costs that would be passed on to anyone buying a gun. In sum, Hatch is not as pro RKBA as you might think.

As for Jim Matheson. I once had occasion to discuss the potential for a renewal of the AWB in the wake of the 2008 election with him face to face. He, at that time, proudly told me of his NRA A rating and his opposition to the bill. He noted that we had it for ten years and it didn't do anything. He claimed he would vote against it. However, he is singing a mighty different tune as of late.

Matheson has a habit of playing the tune he thinks folks want to hear. Notably is his tendency to pass himself off as a good Mormon, when in fact he is not an active member, save for when he makes his pre election appearances. I'm saying nothing one way or another about being a mormon or not (to each his own, that is a liberty as fundamental as the 2nd,) but it is his duplicity I don't like. Things like not even being open and honest about your most core personal beliefs make it hard to trust a guy. From a recent news article found here http://www.ksl.com/?sid=23458586&ni...h-in-on-gun-violence-solutions&s_cid=queue-13

Congressman Jim Matheson says now may be a unique opportunity to talk more openly about gun policy.

"My sense is there is a genuine desire — and this crosses party lines — I think there is a genuine desire to put everyone's collective heads together and keep this from happening again," Matheson said.

Matheson did take nearly $7K from the NRA. http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/17/politics/gun-control-lawmakers/index.html We will see what kind of loyalty that buys.

Matheson was one I thought wouldn't turn and he still might not. It is no secret he has statewide ambitions (I think he held off on a Senate run after his brother's test run for governor didn't go as well as he thought it might and there was so much resentment against Democrats in 2010). His last race was very close so he may not want to take needless risks. I think the vote wont be close enough in the house that his vote will really matter and thus he will be off the hook and able to vote no. If it is close I'll be really worried about him. If you are in his district definitely make your voice heard.

I'll have to look at the mother jones numbers and compare them to my list which is almost done.

 

[Girodin]

I just scanned that mother Jones list. Which one's do you think are "beyond ridiculous?" I only skimmed through it quickly but it looks about like what I have.

 

[OilyPablo]

The reaction times of the Senators who want a ban tells me they have always wanted a ban.

Start contacting the no comment/not committed Senators ASAP.

 

[mljdeckard]

The MJ list gives the benefit of every doubt and every vague statement to "for". They also have ?s next to many names that aren't. (Orrin Hatch, for example.)

 

[Girodin]

They have simply given question marks to people who have not made public comments one way or another in the wake of the crime.

That said, I'm not so sure Hatch isn't a question mark in the broader sense. I have him as a maybe in my own list. A number of people have identified him as one of the more likely republican Senators to vote yes. Hatch put on his uber conservative mask for two years following Bennets ouster in the primaries, he is now in with no ambition for reelection and thus no real fear of being voted out. He is basically free to do whatever now. I was very disappointed that the movement that crushed Bennett couldn't see through Hatch's tactics, but whatever. The point for our purposes here is that he has done gun control before and may be open to it now, particularly given that he doesn't have any reelection concerns. You need to look a little deeper than the R and UT by his name.

 

[mljdeckard]

I've spoken to him personally. I don't see him supporting any new legislation.

 

[Girodin]

I hope you are right.

Did Senator Hatch tell you outright that he would not support it? When did you speak with him and what specifically did he say? As I said, I spoke to Matheson personally. He said very expressly and without reservation that he would not vote for a new AWB, and look at the things he is saying now. We have seen a number of Senators taking up "new" (or at least new puplic) positions on this in the last few days.

I personally have Hatch as maybe but leaning towards no. I surely hope he is a no. I will be watching to see what he has to say in the coming days. Right now he is in the "I'd rather not say" camp which in and of its self is telling of his integrity and his commitment.

 

[mljdeckard]

Yes. I had a conversation with him shortly after he won in the primary, I was explaining to him why I had not supported him, and what I was worried about if he won. He emphasized that he is now, and always has been against any new gun legislation. I pointed out that his comments and leanings were not always so convincing. He said that he has bent and swayed through the years as part of the political maneuvering to get business done in Washington, and he understands that people like me don't like it, but that isn't how he really feels. From the last campaign I really think he feels he has a legacy to prove, he doesn't want to leave on a Bob Bennett note.

I think Matheson's conviction comes from pure fear. He knows how narrowly his support runs, and his career depends completely on not confirming peoples' suspicions. I have thanked him in the past for not voting for new gun laws.

 

[Zeke/PA]

Let Hillary Clinton cast a ballot, that is if she gets over her "convienient" illness ,concussion, mental lapse or whatever.
Are they CORRUPT?
Yep, the Washington Corruption manifests itself on a daily basis.
Thank God for the Second Amendment!

 

[BSA1]

Having read posts on several forums including THR I have learned two things;

1. How successful the liberals have become at removing teaching of American Government in public schools.

2. How wonderful our system of Government is.

Democracy is designed to be a slow, messy process. Our forefathers wisely
not only separated the power of the Presidency from Congress but also within Congress itself with the Senate representing the power of a Central Government (the States) and the House representing the individual. Our system is designed to prevent one group running roughshod over the desires of the other.

I have read many posts of gun owners that are convinced that Obama with a stroke of the pen is going to severely restrict ownership of firearms, high capacity magazines and ammunition. While the use of Executive Orders has expanded it can not be used to write and enact new laws without the consent of Congress.

The second assumption is the majority of members in both Houses of Congress are going to craft and quickly pass anti-gun laws. On it’s face this idea has merit. Playing on the emotions with a willing media it limits a rational, logical discussion of the true causes and real solutions. But this is where the beauty of our slow, messy Democratic process shines. Passing laws involves crafting language that is not only acceptable to the majority of Congress but withstand the Supreme Court, debate, committee hearings in both Houses, debate, procedural steps, more debate, pressure from special interest groups and finally the voters.

If there is one thing for certain is most members of Congress want to be reelected. This means they pay the most attention to the voters, not the larger non-voting population, but those who actually get out and vote.

To be sure some Districts are so anti-gun that pro 2A voters don’t have a prayer of a voice. This is where special interest groups come into play. Your contribution to the NRA will help give them the money to fight the libs and the media which delivers it’s anti-gun tripe for free.

The debate is also shifting with serious discussion of arming teachers. Mass shootings have educated the public to how ineffective law enforcement is at responding to incidents. We now have a couple of decades of experience proving the same old “solutions” i.e. AWB, magazine bans, etc, simply have not worked.

So the gun debate will continue but it should not be taken for granted, as some forum members believe, it will be for more restrictions on firearms.

 

[HankR]

I should probably add, I am glad to live in a state where I can remind my reps what they need to do....but it's really not necessary.

This. Even though I'm sure which way each of my senators will vote on this (one for and one against), they are both getting snail mail letters mailed to them. I'm pointing out how reprehensible it is to put our most prized possessions and our most vulnerable citizens in these pretend gun free zones and allow them to be used as targets by the evil ones. I'll remind the elected representatives that we can't keep weapons and drugs out of our high security prisons, much less the country, so we should consider arming our teachers and allowing CCW permit holders to carry in public schools and should certainly not consider more restrictions on the law abiding citizens.

I've also contacted several of my state legislators to ask them to submit variations of the above (armed teachers, CCW explicitly allowed in schools) at the state level. Being active in RKBA issues at the state level, I know which guys (and gals) would be more receptive. I'd like to say that I was the one that suggested it to each of them, but by the time I got to them they'd heard it from lots of folks already, and bills are being pre-filed.

Also, remember that the Federal senators and representatives are home for the holidays. Out here in flyover country that means some of us will see them in church or at a basketball came or something. Be polite, but show them that we are not giving up and that we are still expecting them to do the right thing. Remind them in writing and in person, at every opportunity.

 

[crazy-mp]

Quote:
A few more semi-surprises to add from the (D) column:

Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) has come out for an AWB, which is a bit of a surprise. Her office made a statement: "Claire supports an assault weapons ban, and wants to take a hard look at the number of rounds in magazines."
Not a surprise for someone who lives in Missouri. Her and Obama are "tight".

We can thank Todd Akin for her being in office......

No joke, there was even a sign that I drove by every day going to work that said "Claire McCaskill - Missouri's Nancy Pelosi"

 

[leadcounsel]

My very real concern is that this isn't 1994 or 2004. In 1992 a moderate Clinton won the Presidency (whereas a superliberal would have lost). A price was paid for the AWB in terms of many lost DEM seats. Things in America were generally good with the economy and no wars.

Today, America is a much different nation. Just 18 years later, we are drowning in debt, massive far reaching and serious scandals, and war. Yet we have super liberal leaders that somehow managed to get elected with no experience and re-elected despite the absurdly bad records. Americans HAVE a huge appetite for free stuff, socialism, and big Government. It's absurd to watch it happen before my eyes... people WANT to turn in their rights for promises of free stuff.

In a sane world, the bums would have never gotten elected, or thrown out. I am VERY worried about the directions we have chosen...and I am very worried that they'll get the votes needed in the Senate and the House, and Obama will sign it with a big smile. A death blow for the 2nd Amendment, to the cheers of the populace...

 

[481]

My very real concern is that this isn't 1994 or 2004. In 1992 a moderate Clinton won the Presidency (whereas a superliberal would have lost). A price was paid for the AWB in terms of many lost DEM seats. Things in America were generally good with the economy and no wars.

Today, America is a much different nation. Just 18 years later, we are drowning in debt, massive far reaching and serious scandals, and war. Yet we have super liberal leaders that somehow managed to get elected with no experience and re-elected despite the absurdly bad records. Americans HAVE a huge appetite for free stuff, socialism, and big Government. It's absurd to watch it happen before my eyes... people WANT to turn in their rights for promises of free stuff.

In a sane world, the bums would have never gotten elected, or thrown out. I am VERY worried about the directions we have chosen...and I am very worried that they'll get the votes needed in the Senate and the House, and Obama will sign it with a big smile. A death blow for the 2nd Amendment, to the cheers of the populace...

I agree, leadcounsel- it seems as if the American electorate has lost their collective mind. I keep hoping that we'll see some sort "turn-around", but that line of thought (hope?) seems delusional given the increasing clamor to become Europe.

 

[mljdeckard]

I want to be careful in how strongly I phrase it. I don't think it will pass. That doesn't mean they won't play dirty. That doesn't mean we won't get a surprise or two along the way. We shouldn't underestimate them. This one will need our A game. But I don't think they have a chance in the house.

 

[Old Fuff]

But I don't think they have a chance in the house.

At least not before 2014 when everyone in the House is up for reelection. At that time we might see again what happened in 1996.

In an election very few voters on the other side will decide who to support based on firearms issues because they'll be more concerned about other ones. On our side this might not be the case, and during the past the "gun rights vote" has made a critical difference in close elections.

All of those folks that are lined up in gunshops buying everything in sight - guns, magazines, ammunition etc.) are not going to forget Obama and his party.

 

[ETXhiker]

"My very real concern is that this isn't 1994 or 2004. In 1992 a moderate Clinton won the Presidency (whereas a superliberal would have lost). A price was paid for the AWB in terms of many lost DEM seats. Things in America were generally good with the economy and no wars.

Today, America is a much different nation. Just 18 years later, we are drowning in debt, massive far reaching and serious scandals, and war. Yet we have super liberal leaders that somehow managed to get elected with no experience and re-elected despite the absurdly bad records. Americans HAVE a huge appetite for free stuff, socialism, and big Government. It's absurd to watch it happen before my eyes... people WANT to turn in their rights for promises of free stuff.

In a sane world, the bums would have never gotten elected, or thrown out. I am VERY worried about the directions we have chosen...and I am very worried that they'll get the votes needed in the Senate and the House, and Obama will sign it with a big smile. A death blow for the 2nd Amendment, to the cheers of the populace... "

Bingo.

 

[hso]

Nothing is a "done deal" when it comes to politics, but especially so with an AWB. Months of political fighting will be associated with it and there are many in the Senate that won't compromise on a ban on firearms.

The question boils down to is there enough votes in the Senate to pass an AWB. We'll have to find out.