Harry Reid’s gun control bill has been voted through to the Senate floor for debate and amendment. “Senate Heads Off Filibuster on Gun Bill” trumpets usatoday.com. Shockingly, that isn’t really the whole story. As Jennifer Rubin at WaPo reported, there was never much chance of a filibuster at this point in the process. WTF? What happened to Rand Paul and his 13 buddies? Easy there, big fella. The Republicans let the bill move to the floor because they’d like nothing better than to get the five red state Dems (Baucus, Begich, Hagan, Landrieu and Pryor) whose terms are up in 2014 on record when it comes time to vote for amendments like DiFi’s assault weapons ban and the Manchin/Toomey background check compromise. Pour yourself a cold frosty and pop some corn. Now it gets interesting.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

162 COMMENTS

  1. There is no way anything infringing on the 2nd Amendment makes it through the house so whatever happens in the Senate is all political theatre. They’ll try and do stuff…maybe even pass it…but it’ll die in the House. At least SOME of the checks and balances are still working. That’s more than I can say for the Supreme Court…

    • Don’t be so sure. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner’s (R-WI) letter back to me what nowhere near as strong as Ron Johnson’s letter. Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) was unequivocal about not supporting anything the Dems would propose relating gun control. In his letter to me, Sensenbrenner’s thought it was a good idea to tell me that he was a major backer of the original Brady Gun bill … Given what I wrote in my letter, either his staff are completely tone-deaf, or they don’t care what we have to say. Let’s not let this get anywhere. They are not giving up a single thing for us. How is this a compromise in any way imaginable? It’s like the Republicans have never played chess or something…

      • Same exact experience except i received a second letter from Sensebrenner that was much stronger than the first. It was almost like his office had two versions. Still liked Ron’s better.

    • Letting this get through the Senate to “put Democrats on record” and then assuming it will die in the house is sort of like letting an Al Quieda car bomber through a few barricades so you can supposedly stop them at the Embassy door.
      These are our rights that they are playing procedural games with. Our elected representatives should be using every political, parlimentary, procedural, logical, and emotional weapon at their disposal to stop this crap dead in its tracks.

      • Defens says:

        “Letting this get through the Senate to “put Democrats on record” and then assuming it will die in the house is sort of like letting an Al Quieda car bomber through a few barricades so you can supposedly stop them at the Embassy door.
        These are our rights that they are playing procedural games with. Our elected representatives should be using every political, parliamentary, procedural, logical, and emotional weapon at their disposal to stop this crap dead in its tracks.”

        You’re absolutely right! And be sure to drop a line and express your displeasure to the 16 Republican turncoats that voted for the motion to proceed in order to give the Dems a shot at yet more 2nd Amendment infringement. They are:

        Burr, NC
        Isakson, GA
        Chambliss, GA
        Ayotte, NC
        McCain, AZ
        Collins, ME
        Heller, NV
        Wicker, MS
        Hoeven, ND
        Graham, SC
        Alexander, TN
        Corker, TN
        Toomey, PA
        Flake, AZ
        Coburn, OK
        Kirk, IL

    • No matter how sweet it might taste please don’t swallow the RNC Kool-Aid. If you think John Boehner is some sort of invulnerable bastion of 2nd Amendment support then you are appallingly naive. Every single Democrat in the House can be assumed to support gun control if Pelosi, Obama, Bloomberg, the Lapdog Media and the DNC put the screws to them. Add just 16 blue state Republican sell outs and bingo, The Dear Leader gets his historic victory on gun control. Still feeling confident?

      • You mean the same John Boehner who beat Obama and the Democrats on the fiscal cliff holding a pair of duces to Obama’s full house?

    • I remember hearing “Obama expanded gun rights during his first term” about a year ago when many of us said if he was reelected that he’d go after guns…

      It’s tough being right…

      • My favorite part is when people who said that whine when we remind them now. It’s your own fault, kids! Did it to yourselves.

      • I called it as well. It’s pretty safe to tell a whole lot of folks “I told you so.” RF could claim the same. We need to keep on this and let your Reps know that you oppose gun control. I’ll be contacting Ed Royce and will insist he oppose these measures. Now, Republican, Independent, Democrat, etc. matters a whole lot less than whether or not you will defend the 2A rights that responsible citizens deserve.

        • RF could claim the same

          Uhm, what? RF campaigned quite hard to get Obama re-elected and told millions of gun owners that “Obama won’t come after guns” and “Obama expanded gun rights”.

      • He did cede contol in National parks to the states. Even if it was just a ruse to sedate us into allowing later infringement, it did restrict federal overreach (expand rights).

        • That little ditty was strapped to a bill he could not afford to veto, so he signed it. Kind of like give a little take a lot attitude.

      • Oh, forgive us, Anointed One, for we are not psychic. Please, allow me into your basement so I, too, can make a tin foil hat and psychotically mumble to myself about how the reptilians are sending black helicopters to round me up for supper. Seriously, just because you “predicted” something, doesn’t make you psychic. It seems that liberals aren’t the ONLY ones that follow mainstream conspiracist icons.

    • Gun owners had no choice in the last election. Obama was bad, so was Romney. Romney had already signed gun bans and the rights of Americans aren’t real high on the list of important things with the NeoCons he surrounded himself with.

      • Don’t be a fool. The Democratic Party platform preached the gospel of gun bans; the Republican platform endorsed 2A. While Obama was meeting Sarah Brady, Romney was meeting Wayne Lapierre. It’s shallow thinking that helped to land us in this mess.

        • You’re so right! The Republicans may be dragged along sometimes but the Democrats are driving the truck.

        • Here is the problem with believing party platforms. IT IS ALL A CON JOB! Romney was the architect of the current restrictive gun controls in Massachusetts, when he was Governor. Why? Because that stand got him elected.

          Then, years later, he is pro gun. Why? To get our vote.

          Moral of the story. All politicians are only in it for the power and the MONEY!

          Our ONLY option is to stay on top of them and make certain they understand we will do our best to take away their keys to the US mint if they go after our rights.

          Believe in a party platform?? Not on you life.

        • Romney was the architect of the current restrictive gun controls in Massachusetts, when he was Governor.

          Utter nonsense.

        • Naw, it ain’t “shallow thinking” that’s got us in this mess, it’s the Republicans running gun hating pretty boys and air headed Neo Cons instead of strict construction, pro 2A candidates. I’m done voting for the lesser of two evils………..

      • I keep hearing that “Romney would be just as bad”, but if there is one thing the Republicans differ from on the Democrats, when there is an outcry to stop, they stop. Obamacare or anything like it would never have been passed by the Republicans, they would never have pushed that hard against opposition.

        Likewise, Romney’s views may differ from my own, but I don’t think he would EVER push this hard for gun control measures.

        Sorry, in no way is it comforting to me that Romney’s previous record on gun control so bad. I think Romney would actually be focusing on the economy and things that would make this country better rather than distracting us with meaningless gun control.

        • You mean the past that didn’t happen the way that you think it did.

          Educate yourself. The law that Romney signed improved protections for gun owners in Mass. It also made the ARB permanent but there was a veto-proof majority in both houses in favor of that.

        • @foggy, the MA AWB enacted in 1998 — way before Romney — was already permanent. Unlike the federal law, it had no sunset (expiration date) clause.

      • Obama, even before he got to use Sandy Hook as an excuse, was far worse than Romney. Obama was the worst gun grabber in both the Illinois legislature and the U.S. Senate. He was also head of the freaking Joyce Foundation, the anti-N.R.A.!!!

      • Why don’t you guys grow up. There is lot maneuvering going on on both sides of the isle. The Republicans know that getting the five red state Democrats to vote for a gun control measure greatly enhances their chance of making major gains in the Senate next year. It’s a win-win. If the Red State Democrats vote for gun control then they won’t be back in 2015. If they vote to kill everything but the most innocuous piece of BS then the they can say “see there isn’t enough Democrats who will vote against the Second Amendment. This administration is out of touch.”

        This looks like a repeat of the fiscal cliff negotiations where Boehner and McConnell took all sorts heat from “real” Republicans as they defeated the President’s political agenda.

      • Anybody who voted for Barry, thinking Mitt would have done the same thing is an effing loser.
        Hey morons (those who voted for Obummer), ALL of this gun grabbing garbage is on YOU.
        Never vote libtard (democrat) AGAIN.
        Liberalism is a mental disorder.

    • You mean he’s not coming after ALL of our guns, even then, THAT’S an exaggeration, too. For one thing, the AWB will reopen the post-ban avenue. Secondly, FBI destroys all registration records and there was no proof of advocacy for federal registry. Soooooooooooo….these are the odds, confiscation: based on what records? The FBI destroys them all. And they have tried it once already in 1976. IT FAILED MISERABLY. What man power? The bullet purchases were made in bulk to save taxpayer dollars and the “tanks” were actually armored trucks, which DHS only kept 16 of them and gave the rest to the military.

      • Still doesn’t explain what DHS is doing with 16 MRAPs. Here’s one thing they aren’t doing with them: border security. There is no reason for DHS to require heavily armored vehicles of any sort. The DHS does not face a threat that has exhibited any armor-defeating capability.

      • If the FBI destroys all records, what does the BATFE think about that? If the FBI destroys all records, how come the police knew every single gun I had ever bought from a LGS? What “post ban avenue” are you talking about? The law proposed required registration in order to keep “grandfathered” MSRs, that would be the official list. You don’t buy 2 billion rounds of hollow points to “save money”. Sounds like you are an anti who still believes in the myth of the MSM.

  3. Are we supposed to be surprised by this? They are going to get their ban one way or another. It’s up to us to comply or not

  4. Those fools that think that bill will do anything positive for us are fools. With influence from Shumer they have stripped out any CCW reciprocity for states which currently do not get recognized.

    There should be no compromise with when it comes to constitutional rights.

    • So, the first report about a compromise said that the language allowing National Reciprocity had been removed. Then a few minutes later, Toomey said he put it and other pro-gun measures in the bill….which is it?

  5. So, the horse trade is that this potentially passes the Senate, in trade for getting them on record voting for it, and then theoretically dies in the House, where Republicans hold a 30-some seat majority?

    • I just want to emphasize theoreticaly. Im an optimist but wont allow myself to be easily disapointed

    • People have been assuming it will just die a quick death in the house but we haven’t heard a peep from any of those reps in a long time. We have no idea where they currently stand. Also, people assumes it couldn’t pass the senate but the MSM and Obama might pull it off, don’t think they can’t do the same in the House. We are playing a dangerous game. If it does fail I read Obama plans to use it against them in 2014 by calling them obstructionist and if you want your kids safe vote democrat. He thinks its a win win for him. Either he gets his bill passed or he will win the House in 14.

  6. totally agree. as much as I wanted the filibuster to “work”, this topic needs to be debated on the senate floor in front of America.

  7. I see this as politicking with our freedom in the balance. Moving it forward gives everyone something to run on, while being “certain” nothing will ever pass the house. It will be interesting to see how progressives (both rep and dem) in red states vote at this point. I can see some rep senators losing seats over this, and hanging on dems keeping seats if they vote against.

  8. Someone correct me if I mis understood, but this just means it will go forward for a vote in the Senate. And it takes 51 votes in the Senate to be sent to the house. So the pressure is now on the 4 dems in red states. Seems very risky to me.

    • You are correct, but stopping it at this point would have been optimal. And Reid wouldn’t have pushed to move it forward if he didn’t think he had the 51 votes to pass.

    • Correct, this vote was to end filibusters and other administrative obstacles. Hypothetically the final vote (requiring 51 votes) can be called at any time. The rest of today’s calendar is set to vote on amendments. If it passes the senate, it will then be sent to the house and begins its new process there.

      • If one Senator objects to shortcutting the procedure then there will be 30 hours of debate. What we need is the text of the proposed law and the text of any amendments. Let your Senators know we want text, not summaries. Tell them to vote no on any amendment that they have not been given the text to read.

    • There is still a 60 vote cloture motion needed after the amendment process for the final majority vote to pass the bill.

      This vote was just to bring the bill to the floor. I think.

      • @armchair that’s was my understanding of the process originally. This morning’s vote has been referred to as a cloture vote, so that’s caused some confusion on my part. It’s hard to find good info on what happens next. I hope you’re right.

        • There was also a cloture vote.

          You need a motion to proceed to bring the bill to the floor. That bill is debatable and thus subject to filibuster. A cloture motion (60 votes) is needed to force a vote on the motion to proceed.

          Usually, after cloture there is 30 hours of further debate before the vote on the thing being filibustered. Under a new rule adopted this year, if both floor leaders, seven senators from the majority, and seven from the minority agree, then on a motion to proceed the 30 hour debate can be skipped and you can go right to the vote on the motion. I believe that it what was done here. We had back to back votes: cloture then motion to proceed.

          Now, Harry gets to make the first amendment as majority leader. He’ll move to amend the Schumer universal background check with the new compromise law.

          Eventually the Senate will want to vote on the bill. If there is a filibuster, there will need to be another cloture motion (60 votes) before the final majority vote.

    • There will be a vote to end debate that can be filibustered before any legislation can go forward for a final vote. 60 votes would be needed to overcome that filibuster.

      The final vote only needs 51, but we can still force a 60 vote threshold before that vote by filibustering the vote to end debate.

      – bsd

      • There is currently one open seat. 50 wins. But the open seat is John Kerry’s, so they basically lost one vote for.

  9. Law abiding gun owners deserve a vote. I want to see who supports any anti-2A laws. 2014 will be interesting, that’s for sure.

    • Why? So the ones who voted against gun owners can get re-elected anyway? This is like a wolf and a bear sitting outside the rabbit hutch, and the rabbit opening the cage door to see who’s going to take the bigger bite. We should be putting iron bars on that door.

      • I want to see which ones are the most dangerous to the 2A so we know who to vote out next year. A lot of them have been giving vague answers on how they support the 2A.

        • I’m of the belief that it’s hard to regain a right that’s been sold down the river. Even if you’re successful in identifying and booting out a few Quislings, there is seldom a repeal of a bad law, and even if there was, the President would need to sign the legislation.

          If we keep playing this game, there will be few 2A rights left to defend by voting in the “right people.”

  10. Dan, in regards to “the exact text of which no one has actually seen”, the text of S.649 has been available for some time:

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113s649pcs/pdf/BILLS-113s649pcs.pdf

    YouTube RURDY4ITNEWS has several videos with excellent breakdowns of its text.

    What HAS NOT been seen by anyone is the Toomey/Manchin “compromise” amendment. No senator has been given text of it yet. It is the first order of business after the Senate returns from lunch.

  11. I am getting really sick of the gun-control lobby.

    First they spread misinformation (intentional or not) about firearms; confusing the public on the difference between civilian arms and military arms.

    Then they are foaming at the mouth for the opportunity to advance their special interest when a tragedy like Newton occurs. Instantly in the media with the help of social-elitists like the billionaire mayor of New York.

    And next is the “when is the NRA going to speak so we can call them nasty names” game. They need a villain always.

    Followed is the whispering in the ears of the survivors “if you support the gun-control lobby, your grieving will have meaning”.

    Next is the “these new laws wouldn’t have stopped the tragedy, but we need to do something”. What direction is it? Why don’t you just tell us what you really want?

    Of course there are the “should criminals be allowed to buy a gun without a background check” polls and the “a gun in the home increase your chance of dying from anything by 1,000%” statistics.

    Their attacks do not go unanswered; gun owners do not like being compared to insane mass murderers, gang-bangers, or common criminals.

    What does that all lead to? A lot of time and energy that could have been devoted to figuring out the system failures and gaps that could have prevented criminals and mass-killers from ever getting to the stage where they point their firearm and pull the trigger for that first bullet.

    In the end we are distracted to the point of ignorance to the issues that could save more lives.

    I don’t like the gun-control lobby. Not at all.

  12. The horse trade is that they get to debate and vote on these bills on the Senate floor (where we will defeat them before they ever get to the House), and in exchange we get the red state Dems and RINOs on record regarding 2nd amendment rights when the votes come up. The closer it is to passing, the worse it is for red state Dems and RINOs.

    If it is clear that defeat of the bill is inevitable, then the most vulnerable Dems and RINOs will be allowed to vote in a way that is pleasing to their constituents. If it is a tight vote, fewer and fewer will be given that option.

    That is why “vulnerable” Senators aren’t our best targets for petitioning efforts. Their vote will be determined not by their personal views nor by their constituent’s views on the subject, but rather by how close the bill is to passing.

    Our ace in the hole is the House where nothing will pass. If we screw up the game in the Senate, it doesn’t really matter since we will defeat it in the House.

    This is win win for us.

    – bsd

    • ||This is win win for us.||

      This sentiment may be a bit premature. The background checks in some form seem very likely to pass, including in the House – once they clear the Senate, there will be too much pressure on the House to go along. The real issue at this point, other than contemplating 2014 and beyond, is what else will be in the bill when it lands on the President’s desk.

  13. So…they’re voting on a bill that is not written yet? Or it’s being written? Will they be writing it after it passes?

    • They voted to move it forward to the debate and amendment phase. The text of bill S.649 has been public for some time (see my comment up the page), but the Toomey/Manchin compromise amendment (announced yesterday) has no text to it yet, and is to be voted on later today.

      • Schumers bill shouldn’t be debated because its a gross violation of the Bill of Rights. I wasn’t aware the senate could change the constitution via simple majority. This should have been blocked.

    • Like Obamacare, who cares what it says? Just vote it in and figure it out later, thats the fair and balanced approach y’know.

      • More accurately, “Just vote it in and avoid having to figure it out later.”

        Reading these atrocities really eats up the time we have to impose more police state measures.

  14. Prediction:

    The America we wake up to tomorrow morning will not be the same America we have today. And I imply this is a bad way.

    “…if anyone thinks a vote can fix our problems, they haven’t been paying attention.”
    ~Anonymous

    • The Toomey Amendment allows record keeping and allows doctors to rat out patients to the feds they suspect of ‘mental illness’ without the patients knowledge.

      Don’t assume this is a harmless bill. If Chucky Schmuck Schumer approves of it you know it’s a bad, bad bill. That man’s hands are always in tyranny.

      • This whole thing is a colossal violation of the 2nd Amendment, and anybody who doesnt understand that is seriously uninformed.

        • It’s not just about the background checks, for they really are meant to be just the first step.

          It wouldn’t surprise me if in an ideal world even many TTAG readers would accept substantial firearms regulations, provided only that they were of a “shall issue” kind. The problem is that we don’t live in an ideal world, and looking at the history of gun legislation in the more restrictive places, the tendency to make it more and more onerous over time is unmistakable.

          NYC, Chicago, and DC are good examples, but Great Britain is the logical end point, and the history of how it came about there makes for an interesting, if rather lengthy, read:

          http://guncite.com/journals/okslip.html

        • Is there a prohibition on enjoying high quality German firearms , as my moniker suggests, and supporting reasonable restrictions on firearm purchases? I thought we were the armed intelligencia. I guess no room for dissent here.

        • There’s nothing reasonable about making it a crime for a husband to leave his gun at home with his family should he leave for more than 7 days. There’s nothing reasonable about the Federal government keeping a database of who has guns. All of which the Schumer bill does and more. There is nothing reasonable about Chuck Shumer or anything he purposes or supports. The man is diabolical.

        • In your mind are there any restrictions on gun use that are reasonable? I’ll answer for you and assume not. That isn’t very reasonable, is it?

        • Violent criminals shouldn’t have guns. If caught they deserve maximum punishment but that’s not what this bill does now does it?

        • hk,

          There is plenty of room for dissent. It is simply clear that you don’t understand the gun control endgame. If a neighbor watches a house that contains guns for more than 7 days, both he and the original owners become felons. The title may talk about “background checks” but the content is far more sinister.

          I like German firearms also, but I don’t buy them because they (companies such as HK) tend to scorn civilian gun owners. But hey, it’s a free country until the grabbers get their way. Keep supporting the grabbers and we’ll get additional fees, taxes, restrictions, bans, and confiscations.

        • That is the attitude that got us in this mess in the first place, so stop with the arrogance. And, no, you cannot “enjoy German firearms” and believe in “reasonable restrictions” on firearm purchases.

  17. A vote for Cloture is a vote for gun control. Make no mistake. These 16 republicans who refused to demand 60 votes instead of a simple majority for full passage are a disgrace and do not respect the Bull of Rights.

    • Trying to depend on Republican Senators is like trying to pick up a dog turd by the clean end.

      My “conservative” Republican Georgian Senators both voted with the majority.

    • They still can demand 60 votes for passage. This cloture was just to bring the bill to the floor.

    • Here’s the thing. I can’t hope to ever own a Ferrari. I personally drive an old beat up Lincoln. I can however, own the “Ferrari” of firearms. A nice AR15 with all of the bells and whistles picked out specifically for me (think of it as choosing the thread color in the leather upholstery). That is something I can strive for. Sure I don’t “need” it in an absolute sense but, I though this country was founded partially on the pursuit of happiness and not needs? I’m sure we can all agree an AR15 that you built yourself ringing steel at 400 yards makes you happy.

      I hate it when pretentious “special people” tell me what I should do with my time and money. Don’t you?

      • I think the AR-15 is more like a V8 Mustang. Decent sportscar, obtainable by most anyone with a decent job especially if you’re willing to look at used.

        The Ferrari’s would be the Springfield M1A’s, FN SCAR’s, or a nice ACR. Something that routinely starts at over $1,500 and really turns heads at the range. Alas, nothing that I own (Much like a Ferrari)

        • Why arent special driver licenses required for Ferraris, Porsches, BMW’s etc?

          The anti gun crowd always compares cars to guns, “you need permission to drive a car” so why are these same limousine liberals not requiring supercar owners get a background check and prove their proficiency driving these high powered machines of death?

        • Oh how they would love to do what you suggest. The greenies hate supercars and their big fuel burning engines, but SUV’s are an easier target and more common.

          They would love to take away all of those nice cars and spend the money on some social program, or specifically on some social program director’s salary. Unless said supercar is driven by a Hollywood celebrity, because apparently they are allowed to do whatever the hell they want.

          Likewise, gun control is really just more hoops to make sure only the upper class is armed. Make it expensive and difficult enough and the only people who own guns are those who make earn an upper class income.

        • Unfortunately I am also a car nut. So I also have to deal with stupid BS laws there. Some idiot from California wrote legislation for Oregon to regulate vehicle exhaust making any aftermarket exhaust illegal. It was also supposed to be passed under emergency conditions. It’s the same underhanded political game by the same type of statists. Luckily it went nowhere.

      • I don’t know many people who have been in a firefight, but of the few I do none of them ever complained about having too many bullets.

        • Right? Nobody who I talked who has been in a firefight ever said, dam that gun was just to heavy with that standard capacity magazine in it. I wish I would have had a 7 rounder!

    • Kelly Ayotte sure rewarded the Tea Party for getting her elected. The worms always turn, especially in the putrid dirt of DC.

      • Didn’t take long did it? I’ve noticed her paling around with the same sex senators McCain and Graham lately. Speaking of…

        How much you wanna bet John McCain and Lindsey Graham throw in with the Statists when it comes to the final vote?

        • McLame and Goober Graham are statists at heart, always have been. How a light in the loafers goof like Goober got elected in supposed Baptist bible belt SC is a mystery for the ages. Worms all of them.

        • @Saul Grahm hasn’t had any competition, so he keeps winning by default. You can bet your @ss we will be voting him out next cycle…that is IF anyone will run against him.

  20. Welcome to the next four (if we’re lucky) years folks. We will be fighting the gun grabbers on the federal level until we have a President that is unequivocally supportive of our right to keep and bear arms. They will not stop attacking and, while it is tiresome to have the same argument over and over again, it must be done. At the state level, those of us in slave states (NY for me) have tough choices to make. Legislative due process has let us down. Criminals have usurped power and passed laws that are patently stupid and most likely unconstitutional. Our redress is to be had in the courts and at the ballot box in 2013 and beyond. This is what the future holds. I’m digging in for the fights ahead.

    • I just notified my state Republican Party headquarters of my intention to change my registration tomorrow.

      If those of us who are genuinely concerned about the direction of our Senators and Representatives are attempting to take this county in would also change to either Independant or Libertarian and notify their former parties of the reason, perhaps the numbers switching would get the attention of the two parties big wigs….or not….probably not.

      • I suspect many on this site would object to the libertarian view on the support of Israel and military spending. But by all means, pull that lever.

        • As do I, but if enough former mainstream party members switched, they would be able to moderate if not change some extreme positions. And by the time that party reaches a majority, it will be just as dependent on lobbyist and consultants as the Republican party is now, but by then I will be gone.

        • HK, I’d like to pull the lever of an ejection seat that sent you head first in the Hanger ceiling. Go troll elsewhere.

        • Those “extreme positions” are basic tenets of libertarianism. I doubt the Pauls would welcome changes that would essentially turn them into GOP #2.

        • Long live the state of Israel, the only civilized nation in the Middle East! God bless the Jewish people!

          Got a problem with that, `German firearm fan’?

  21. This will likely make it out of the senate then will die in the house handing Obama the excuse he’s seeking to continue to demagogue the house republicans. He doesn’t want gun control passed. He wants to a camping issue and the 16 senate turncoats handed it to him. It’s all about 2014 for him.

    • +1 2014 and distracting the people from the economy….but that doesn’t mean that it can’t pass, remember this is the cause de’jour for the media. If it passes it would be a bonus for Obama but you are right, his main concern is keeping his base riled up and winning a majority in the House….and then its whatever he wants for the last two years.

      • Because of the political demographics of the country the Democrats can only take back the house if people throw a fit and stay home. The Democrats rack up huge majorities in a relatively few districts. This works in electing senators and getting electoral votes it doesn’t help them win enough house seats to get a majority. Winning Chicago or NYC congressional districts with 80+% of the vote does nothing to win Suburban, exurban and rural districts elsewhere.

        • You obviously don’t know how to read very well:

          “This works in electing senators and getting electoral votes it doesn’t help them win enough house seats to get a majority. ”

          Given the amount fraud that has already been discovered it’s not even clear that Obama had majority of the popular vote even did win the electoral vote.

      • And by refusing to bend on even the most innocuous of legislation, you’re giving him one. Enjoy 2016!

        • Of course not. I would never claim to speak for the 90+% of the public that supports expanding background checks! Enjoy your ever shrinking demographics!

          So will it be Cruz or Paul? Who wants to wager a guess on electoral count?

        • hkfan, shrinking demographics? Who’s got the gun and ammo malers working round the clock and still can’t keep up with demand?

          Shrinking demographics is just another gun grabber lie.

      • Expanding on Coloradan’s point. This is all a political shell game and con job on the American people.

        1. Spends months talking gun control, while sequester screws our military and other government services.

        2. Take away focus from weak employment numbers.

        3. No one talking about the sucky economy.

        4. Ammunition for attacking pro gun representative and Senators in 2014. (“Oh how we tried to protect the children” Insert picture with sad little face)

        All a win win for Adolph Obama.

        • How wonderful for the baby butchers too. Total media blackout on the Kermit Gosnell trial because they want to talk about is gun control.

        • Except voting for gun control won’t move Democrats to vote for Republicans but it will cause some Democrats and many independents to vote for pro-Second Amendment Republican. Gun control is not a winning issue for the Democrats.

  22. Here’s a little something that I found. The list of Republicans who voted for the bill and their NRA rating.

    Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) – NRA A rated
    Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) – NRA A rated
    Richard Burr (N.C.) – NRA A rated
    Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) – NRA A rated
    Tom Coburn (Okla.) – NRA A rated
    Susan Collins (Maine) – NRA B+ rated
    Bob Corker (Tenn.) – NRA A rated
    Jeff Flake (Ariz.) – NRA A rated
    Lindsey Graham (S.C.) – NRA A rated
    Dean Heller (Nev.) – NRA A rated
    John Hoeven (N.D.) – NRA A rated
    Johnny Isakson (Ga.) – NRA A rated
    Mark Kirk (Ill.) – NRA D rated
    John McCain (Ariz.) – NRA B+ rated
    Pat Toomey (Pa.) – NRA A rated
    Roger Wicker (Miss.) – NRA A+ rated

    I’ll let you all make of it what you will.

    • It’s called tactics. They are playing for next year but just make sure you don’t outsmart yourself.

    • Asa Hutchinson, NRA spokesman for the Safe
      School Initiative- or whatever they are calling it, was all over the talk shows saying he could abide with UBC, or at least that was how the media reported what he said. He later said he was speaking for himself not the NRA, but does anyone else feel the fix was in? The NRA would not push the Senators to the wall on the background issue if it didn’t go too far? And did anyone else feel the earth move and momentum shift after Hutchinson’s interviews?

  25. If they just want to add a more detailed background check. I am okay with that, as long as it is not a registry of guns and they add “a provision that would require states to recognize concealed carry permits from other states.”

  26. Everyone needs to calm down.

    The majority of senators are pro-gun. Harry couldn’t even get 40 to support an AWB, let alone 60. Now we have a chance to load this thing up with pro-gun amendments. I know many of you are worried about incremental losses to our gun rights, but if we take one small step back on background checks and a big set forward on things like national carry reciprocity, interstate travel protections, among other things, we will come out of this stronger than we entered, and that’s immediately following one of the most horrific shooting sprees imaginable.

    Let the amendment process play out and then see where we are. At this point, before we know what we are dealing with, a filibuster is premature. Those senators who voted for cloture today have done nothing “anti-gun.”

  28. Someone help me out please. Is a background check not already required for internet purchases? I have bought several guns online and in every case, I was required to have it shipped to a gun store where the background check was conducted. Never been to a gun show, but are checks not required there? Can one just buy as many guns as u want with no checks? I thought there already were checks, so this seems redundant. Toomey is swearing there will be no federal registry, but if Schumer is onboard then not sure if I believe that. Been trying to call Sen. Corker and Alexander but can’t get through.

    • You are correct but what they’re trying to stop is people meeting up on forums and making a unlicensed deal.

    • If we live in the same state, then no back ground check is needed for an online sale. For example, floridaguntrader.com.

      If you buy from an online vendor, like palmetto state armory, then you need a background check.

      At a gun show, dealers must still perform a background check. Private sales don’t require them, unless a state specific law applies.

  29. Any bill that has the potential to infringe on our rights should be cut off whenever possible.

    I get the idea that Graham and others want people on the record but so what? They can all vote yes and when Obama comes to grab all the guns for those who don’t register then we will have a national emergency, marshal law and elections suspended ensuring these traitors stay in their cushy positions indefinitely.

    And who is to say Reid will even keep his word on allowing votes on amendments? These people are playing games with my rights and I pray to God someone worthy steps up to get rid of Lindsey Graham next year if we will even be allowed to vote that is.

  30. FROSTY? CHECK. Popcorn? Poison. (Okay, the frosty is poison also, but necessary for survival, paradoxically…)

    Nick Begich is a good guy. A REALLY good guy. Everyone call his office and give moral support. And a bonafide, genius, also.

    Anyway, EFFING PASS IT, ALREADY, MOFOS! We don’t respect your illegal laws anymore. You want my guns? Someone’s gonna die, and if I have any say, I’m not the only one.

  31. I wish everyone here (and everywhere) would stop using the term “Gun Control.” This mess is not about gun control it is about Civilian Disarmament. We accept the terms of the statists instead of using the terms that would help advance the cause of liberty. Refer to this as Civilian Disarmament proposals. Gun control is what I do when I am following the rules of gun safety or when they are in the safe.

  32. The feds can pass whatever laws they like. Then they have to enforce them.

    At that point Farago and the rest of the TTAG crowd will have to make a decision: is the 2nd Amendment about hunting and sporting, or is it about defense against tyranny? There is no neutral position on this question. Quailing about legalities is no answer. The Founders broke the law for the sake of liberty. Will you?

    Sadly, too many of you are still at the kindergarten level of understanding when it comes to this government. The GOP has already sold you out more times than you know, yet you’ll keep voting for them because they’re marginally better than the alternative. While you’re waiting for 2016 to roll around, ballot clutched in your hot little paws, how many doors will have been kicked in by SWAT teams looking for guns? How many families butchered because the cops didn’t feel safe? Will you sit back and tolerate such atrocities while you wait for a Republican to ride in on a white horse? Or will you act?

    Be thinking about it. All other questions are immaterial, and time is running out.

    • Keep me posted on SWAT kicking down the doors. The problem is the choices we have in office. It is a choice between a douche bag and P.O.S. sandwich. South Park reference from a long time ago. The two party system is outdated. Checks and balances no longer work. Corporations run America…and yes, that includes the major ones in the firearm industry. They are loving this all the way to the bank.

      • You really think any US gun maker carries as big a stick as say, Monsanto, GE, Microsoft, Chase bank, Bank of America? Do you really think comparatively small time companies like S&W or Remington have a seat at the table? Please.

        • Yes, they do. Cerebus Capital is big. You just do not like anything negative about the gun industry.

  33. Eh, go ahead and pass it. I want attack after attack, misery after misery, punishment after punishment to be inflicted upon the people of this country for allowing the nation and government to get like this. I want this country to hit rock bottom as soon as possible so that the people can either fight back and reclaim the nation or whither and die like the pathetic slaves they are. Either way, the country will get only what it deserves.

  34. How Screwed up is this?

    He [Sen Wicker, Miss.] has a solidly conservative voting record, so much so that he drew notice last week when he voted to allow debate to begin on controversial gun legislation in the Senate. “I cast this vote at the request of the National Rifle Association, of which I am a member,” he said in a statement at the time that added he has a 100 percent voting record in favor of Second Amendment rights.
    AT THE REQUEST OF THE NRA.
    Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/wicker-letter-ricin-poison/2013/04/16/id/499817?s=al&promo_code=132B9-1#ixzz2Qlermnkf
    Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Comments are closed.