The Hill: Dems Beat Drum for AWB 2.0

[printcraft]

Demoncrats and Republicans are the same on guns I heard it on INGO.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Demoncrats and Republicans are the same on guns I heard it on INGO.

Individuals, not parties.

NRA Endorses 14 House Democrats Over Republicans : It's All Politics : NPR

Meet The NRA-Backed Senate Democrats Who Oppose Obama's Gun Violence Prevention Plan | ThinkProgress

21 NRA ?A?-Rated Senators Part Of 68-31 Vote To Defeat Filibuster Of Background Check Bill | Mediaite

 

[printcraft]

Which national party is consistently pushing gun control?
There is no mystery here.
There are exceptions to every rule, that does not make the general rule invalid.

 

[GIJEW]

pardon the thread-jack, but what did I miss?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

pardon the thread-jack, but what did I miss?

Passed yesterday, I think.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ounty-council-intro-bill-stolen-firearms.html

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Which national party is consistently pushing gun control?
There is no mystery here.
There are exceptions to every rule, that does not make the general rule invalid.

This. Is. INGO.

"We pick nits here!"

 

[BehindBlueI's]

This. Is. INGO.

"We pick nits here!"

It's not nit picking when it's determining elections, and likely policy in some offices. If I'm a democrat and you're going to vote against me anyway, WTF should I bother with an "A" rating from the NRA when it's only going to hurt me with some of my base? If I'm a republican, WTF should I bother to work to remove existing gun restrictions when you're going to vote for me anyway because (R)?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It's not nit picking when it's determining elections, and likely policy in some offices. If I'm a democrat and you're going to vote against me anyway, WTF should I bother with an "A" rating from the NRA when it's only going to hurt me with some of my base? If I'm a republican, WTF should I bother to work to remove existing gun restrictions when you're going to vote for me anyway because (R)?

Point taken. But I took Printcraft's comment as more of a rhetorical retort to the oft repeated refrain that there's no difference between D's and R's -- especially on guns. While you'll find the occasional D in support and the R that is extremely disappointing, to deny that, in general, there is a philosophical difference between the positions of the two parties is wrong, in my opinion. One is consistently proposing and pushing gun control related measures and the other...while not as offensively minded as I'd prefer, generally opposes those D proposals.

This does point to another problem here though. I'll use the Tennessee senators as an example: Both are republicans (Alexander and Corker) that are well established. They are **** poor on many conservatarian type issues. But you can't primary them out because of their name recognition and party support. More than likely, the democrat opponent will be more in line with Harold Ford (if you're lucky -- kinda) and more like Carol McKinney.

 

[cobber]

Yeah but it made them feel good. That's worth something.

So would a good , but one doesn't expect to see congressmen taking one in public.

 

[IndyDave1776]

“Assault weapons are designed for the sole purpose of killing as many people as quickly as possible,” Cicilline said in a statement to The Hill.

The same could be said of five-stranded hemp rope, particularly regarding traitors.

 

[cbhausen]

Individuals, not parties.

NRA Endorses 14 House Democrats Over Republicans : It's All Politics : NPR

Meet The NRA-Backed Senate Democrats Who Oppose Obama's Gun Violence Prevention Plan | ThinkProgress

21 NRA ?A?-Rated Senators Part Of 68-31 Vote To Defeat Filibuster Of Background Check Bill | Mediaite

Seriously???

90 (that's NINETY) Democrat co-conspirators on this one:

House Democrats Introduce Bill to Ban Manufacture of 'Assault Weapons' - Breitbart

Almost all Democrats and very few Republicans are for decimating the Second Amendment. Makes it pretty easy to pick sides. Our undocumented immigrant president implored us to become one-issue voters on guns so I'm giving the Kenyan what he asked for. And I'm going to work my ass off to make sure we don't have to suffer through another four years of a Democrat in the White House. When I said I'm sick of this **** I meant it.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Seriously???

90 (that's NINETY) Democrat co-conspirators on this one:

House Democrats Introduce Bill to Ban Manufacture of 'Assault Weapons' - Breitbart

Almost all Democrats and very few Republicans are for decimating the Second Amendment. Makes it pretty easy to pick sides. Our undocumented immigrant president implored us to become one-issue voters on guns so I'm giving the Kenyan what he asked for. And I'm going to work my ass off to make sure we don't have to suffer through another four years of a Democrat in the White House. When I said I'm sick of this **** I meant it.

So don't vote for those 90. That's less than half of House Democrats, btw. It's easy to look at things in black and white, you don't have to think or research.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/hr6257 5 Republicans bringing a bill to renew the Clinton AWB. I wonder how many gunowners figured they'd picked the right side when they voted for them because (R) and because they weren't Clinton.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/108/hr3831 Republican introduced bill to renew the Clinton AWB, 11 more Republicans signed on. I wonder how many gunowners figured they'd picked the right side when they voted for them because (R) and because they weren't Clinton.

Remember Feinstein's last push for an assault weapons ban? It was defeated 60-40 in the Senate. How many Democrats voted against it? 15. Right. Pro-gun Democrats were the difference between no new assault weapons ban and having a new (stricter) assault weapons ban. You throw them under the bus because they have to be anti-gun because (D) and what does that vote look like?

Vote individuals, not parties. It's harder. You have to research and see where people stand, what their past votes have been, scores from lobbying groups, etc. In the end, you probably end up with a better government than one you voted for based on the marketing of the party.

 

[Expat]

Harry Reid used to have a good NRA rating, until he didn't.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Here it is.

Dems introduce bill to ban assault weapons | TheHill

 

[Jwmeador]

“Assault weapons are designed for the sole purpose of killing as many people as quickly as possible,” Cicilline said in a statement to The Hill.

Leaving aside for a moment the fact that the very term is a falsehood in both intended meaning and literal translation and accepting, again, for a moment, their term "assault weapons" as applicable to the AR-pattern rifle pictured in the story, I need a question answered: If "assault weapons" are designed for the sole purpose of killing as many people as quickly as possible... just exactly why is it that our many police agencies around the country are armed with those very items under the name "patrol rifles"... some of which, if I recall, are still capable of three-round-burst automatic fire, unlike those readily available to non-LEOs?

Why would that be, Mr. Cicilline?

Maybe im about ready to sound too extreme for our time in history, but even if "Assault Weapons" were designed for the sole purpose of killing as many people as possible that is still not a reason to ban them! The 2nd Amendment was written in the context of self defense and Arming ourselves against a tyrannical Government. So what is the point that is trying to be made?

IMO opinion if the left can make the argument that guns that are designed to kill people should be banned and we respond with any other argument we have already lost and it's just a matter of time before they get an AR AK ban put into place. It is ok to want a weapon that can kill as many people as possible the most efficiently. IMO those weapons offer you the best defensive options. The 2nd Amendment as far as I'm aware of was not written to protect just hunters.

 

[Lee11b]

I got excited when Obama went to Africa last year....."my village called, and I the idiot will return".....why did they refuel Air Force One!?!?!?! Biden could have filled in....bought 2 shotguns because of him......LOL

 

[cbhausen]

Historically, (R) vs. (D) is pretty clear-cut... If you had to have a supermajority of either, BBI, which would you choose???

 

[IndyDave1776]

Harry Reid used to have a good NRA rating, until he didn't.

Yes, and he NEVER deserved it, along with a lot of other people the NRA treated kindly in spite of not exactly being our friends.

Historically, (R) vs. (D) is pretty clear-cut... If you had to have a supermajority of either, BBI, which would you choose???

Hmmm....we had a R supermajority for 6 years in tandem with a R president who did absolutely nothing for us, where the same situation the previous decade brought us the 1994 AWB. It seems like a choice between sorry, sorry friends or motivated sworn enemies.

 

[KG1]

Eventually this whole deal will come to a head and will end up in SCOTUS's hands. I'm not really getting a positive vibe for a favorable outcome. If it gets to that point the 2nd Amend could drastically change from the way we've always understood it to be. My feeling is it could be determined that the 2nd Amend is not unlimited and .gov has the authority to regulate based upon the general welfare of it's citizens. In other words if they make a determination that "assault weapons" are a threat to the general welfare they could be within their authority to regulate them.

There have already been indications that the courts are leaning the way of limitations to the 2nd Amend. Even Justice Scalia has alluded to the opinion that there are some limitations that could be imposed and it's up to future court cases to determine what those limitations are.

I'm not happy about any of this just like anyone else and i'm not trying to be mr. super negative but one would be foolish to deny the rough waters that lie ahead.

The fight arena should be focused on winning any and all legislative battles and strongly supporting candidates that give us the best chance to win this fight first and foremost. IMO that is truly our best option at this point.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Good evening, Preacher... I'm the choir.

Do note that I said, "leaving aside for the moment".

To clarify, I was saying "This rectal orifice is wrong from the outset, but even ignoring his most glaring error, he's still got a petard by which he should be hoisted."

This is also why I don't use the term "assault weapon" other than in quotes, much like "gun control". Both are misnomers, used to rally the anti-gun base that usually seems so devoted to the Democratic (sic) Party

Blessings,
Bill

Maybe im about ready to sound too extreme for our time in history, but even if "Assault Weapons" were designed for the sole purpose of killing as many people as possible that is still not a reason to ban them! The 2nd Amendment was written in the context of self defense and Arming ourselves against a tyrannical Government. So what is the point that is trying to be made?

IMO opinion if the left can make the argument that guns that are designed to kill people should be banned and we respond with any other argument we have already lost and it's just a matter of time before they get an AR AK ban put into place. It is ok to want a weapon that can kill as many people as possible the most efficiently. IMO those weapons offer you the best defensive options. The 2nd Amendment as far as I'm aware of was not written to protect just hunters.