Gun Legislation FAILS In Senate

[Deltamud77]

As it turns out, Roger Wicker was right. On top of that, Mary Landrieu from Louisiana was stupid enough to vote yes on the measure and most assuredly sealed her fate in the next election. That will be at least one positive seat gain for the Rs in the mid-terms.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/1 ... 03341.html

WASHINGTON -- The Senate failed to muster sufficient support Wednesday for a gun-buyer background check bill that's supported by nearly 90 percent of Americans, voting the measure down in a procedural vote that likely dooms any major legislation to curb gun violence.

The measure -- painstakingly crafted by the bipartisan duo of Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) -- was seen as the key to getting the first measure in decades to address the sorts of mass slaughters that so recently horrified the country in Newtown, Conn., where 20 children and six teachers were gunned down, and in Auroro, Colo., where moviegoers where killed in a theater.

The amendment failed 54 to 46, falling short of the 60-vote threshold needed to break a filibuster of the measure, even as victims of the Sandy Hook shootings watched from the Senate gallery and activists at a vigil outside the Capitol read the names of people slain since then, hoping to prompt action.

Show is over...get on about your business (which will hopefully include the ability to actually find ammo now as well as reasonably priced guns).

[Ster]

The measure -- painstakingly crafted by the bipartisan duo of Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) -- was seen as the key to passing the first legislation in decades to address the sorts of mass slaughters that so recently horrified the country in Newtown, Conn., where 20 children and six educators were gunned down at an elementary school, and in Auroro, Colo., where 12 people were killed in a theater.

Anyone care to explain to me how extended background checks would have in any way prevented Any of the above mentioned atrocities as the article states?

[Deltamud77]

They would not have. I am all for background checks for mentally ill...but I have yet to hear a reasonable way to do that without mandated cooperation from health care officials. If someone wants to kill a bunch of people, it is not hard. Heck, I could simply get in my vehicle and run through a crowd of people at high speed. They gonna ban cars too? You think it is possible to keep crazy people from driving or even getting a DL? Nope.

[JaMak84]

but I have yet to hear a reasonable way to do that without mandated cooperation from health care officials.

Rorschach test?

[4dawgma]

We should celebrate. I'll have 2 titties and a shot of jäger

[stang67]

I want y'all to know that President Obama put me in my place today. I feel utterly ashamed and embarrassed for writing my senator and intimidating them into opposing this amendment...... http://news.yahoo.com/video/obama-slams ... 08095.html

Bwahahahahaha.

What a whiny buffoon!

[judge jb]

i have some high capacity mags and ammo for sell, cheap. ! never thought this.

judge jb

[peewee]

i have some high capacity mags and ammo for sell, cheap. ! never thought this.

judge jb

Good point Judge, maybe ill be able to find some 22 bullets now so me and my little girl can shoot.

[mudsucker]

SOOOooooo..... Was this the "up and Down" vote that the "other" measure was for? If so, is Wicker a GENUIS now???????? Damn people. It's about gamesmanship to get the Dems to step on their cranks! Come on man!

[kb7722]

I was pretty shocked to hear in the President's speech yesterday that 90% of Americans support tougher background checks. Guess that puts me in the 10% with the criminals and low lives that just want easy access to guns.

[Deltamud77]

I was pretty shocked to hear in the President's speech yesterday that 90% of Americans support tougher background checks. Guess that puts me in the 10% with the criminals and low lives that just want easy access to guns.

The irony of that speech is layered and amazing:
(1) No one knows where he is getting that 90% figure;
(2) He called gun groups (gun owners) liars;
(3) Gallup released a poll yesterday morning that actually says that 4% of the population feels gun control is an important problem...http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup- ... nt-problem; as such
(4) once again, Obama is straight-up lying to the American public while at the same time calling gun groups/owners the liars.

You just cannot make that kind of stuff up.

I have never been a fan of his, but my distain for him hit an all-time high hearing him scold a large majority of the country yesterday. He is without a doubt the worst president this nation has ever seen in my opinion.

[4dawgma]

I was pretty shocked to hear in the President's speech yesterday that 90% of Americans support tougher background checks. Guess that puts me in the 10% with the criminals and low lives that just want easy access to guns.

The irony of that speech is layered and amazing:
(1) No one knows where he is getting that 90% figure;
(2) He called gun groups (gun owners) liars;
(3) Gallup released a poll yesterday morning that actually says that 4% of the population feels gun control is an important problem...http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup- ... nt-problem; as such
(4) once again, Obama is straight-up lying to the American public while at the same time calling gun groups/owners the liars.

You just cannot make that kind of stuff up.

I have never been a fan of his, but my distain for him hit an all-time high hearing him scold a large majority of the country yesterday. He is without a doubt the worst president this nation has ever seen in my opinion.

[Ster]

I was pretty shocked to hear in the President's speech yesterday that 90% of Americans support tougher background checks. Guess that puts me in the 10% with the criminals and low lives that just want easy access to guns.

The way that Washington works is just amazing. President Obama's speech yesterday was a tragedy unto itself. The man is a completely liar, and following the Saul Alinsky playbook (Rules for Radicals) he fully is prepared to lie and deceive in order to achieve the necessary means. As Alinsky states, the end will always justify the means.

The Bill itself was useless and did very little to expand background checks. The Bill exempted background checks for gun exchanges from family members and probably only affected 1% of all gun owners. However, it is impossible for a gun advocate to have any trust from the federal government and congress about any gun legislation when so many democrats are running around talking about banning guns and restricting magazines.

As for the people (90%) that are reported to be in favor of the Bill, the vast majority are not aware that FBI background checks are in place today. The ignorant masses believe that we purchases guns just like we purchase a pair of socks from Wal-mart. So, when a pollster calls and ask if you are in favor of background checks for gun purchases, who in their right mind is going to say, "NO"?

[stang67]

I'm sure that 90% figure comes from a question like "do you support a means of preventing felons, criminally insane from purchasing guns?" A "yes" vote is a vote in favor of background checks.

Listening to Obama condemn the way this is shaking out is further proof that gun control is not about safety, but about people control.

[deltadukman]

I wonder if Piers Morgan is packing his shizz up and moving the F out of the US of A?