It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Senate blocks gun measures offered in wake of Orlando shooting

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+8 more 
posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Good news for Americans

Even if it's a victory born out of partisan hackery and political divisiveness, I'll take it.


WASHINGTON — The Senate as expected on Monday rejected four partisan gun measures offered in the wake of the Orlando massacre.

Two Republican proposals would have increased funding for the national background check system and created a judicial review process to keep a person on a terror watch list from buying a gun.

Two Democratic measures would have expanded background checks to private gun sales and allowed the Justice Department to ban gun sales to suspected terrorists.


This crime was perpetrated because the Nanny Sate dropped the ball. All the gun laws and regulations already on the books worked as they were supposed to. The FBI failed to properly follow through in their investigations, apparently due to State Dept interference guided by PC coddling and apologist ideologies.

But the moral of the story is that Americans were not further robbed of their rights today, because our Govt is broken or perhaps in spite of it being broken. I'm not quite sure.

Below are a variety of sources for whatever spin you might prefer.

Senate blocks gun measures offered in wake of Orlando shooting

Gun control measures fail to clear Senate hurdle

Orlando Massacre Wasn’t Enough To Spur Senate To Pass Gun Control Bills
edit on 20-6-2016 by watchitburn because: Aesthetics




posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Democrats say the GOP is out of step with the American people, pointing to polls that show a majority want stricter gun laws. An NBC News/Survey Monkey online poll conducted after the Orlando massacre last week found 61% of those surveyed support stricter gun laws; 38% opposed them. The survey also found 60% support a ban on "assault weapons" and 38% oppose it.


But Senators are not supposed to vote on national polls because those polls might not be what their states' voters want.

Right?




posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Wouldn't senators swear to uphold the constitution and balance this with the needs of their constituents?



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: xuenchen

Wouldn't senators swear to uphold the constitution and balance this with the needs of their constituents?


What parts of the Constitution are you referring to?


+3 more 
posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ..............



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

I know I wrote my Congressman and both of my Senators in advance of this vote. I reminded them that party doesn't matter to me when it comes to my gun rights. I won't vote for ANYONE that compromises on the 2nd Amendment. I am guessing I wasn't the only one to write them.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

All parts.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

All I can Say is , Thank God for the NRA . Even with All it's Failings , it is Still the Loudest Voice of Freedom in this Freakin' Messed Up Foo King Country we Live in today .
edit on 20-6-2016 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: xuenchen

All parts.


What parts of the Constitution were infringed upon today?




posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Good.

The Senate got it right for a change.

The events present and past have already pretty much covered all the demographics and political climates as they occurred... Students, children, the gay community, and everyday people just going about their business.

What's next? A high profile political assassination??? That won't work either.

No one is going to give up their weapons in the wake of any politicized event, or for any reason at all.

With every "event", gun sales surge...and why wouldn't they?? Who would give up rights for security at this point considering the way the current administration and economic/political climates are geared to NOT protect us??

We are ABSOLUTELY being instigated into rebellion.... What else would this sudden/ongoing, all intrusive agenda accomplish??

It's going to get real sporty very soon if people don't come to their senses.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:09 PM
link   

allowed the Justice Department to ban gun sales to suspected terrorists.


So the JD has a list they're not sharing with the FBI, that would be covered during a normal background check?
Hmm.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: watchitburn

I know I wrote my Congressman and both of my Senators in advance of this vote. I reminded them that party doesn't matter to me when it comes to my gun rights. I won't vote for ANYONE that compromises on the 2nd Amendment. I am guessing I wasn't the only one to write them.


You are not the only one. I did as well last night.
edit on 6/20/2016 by TXTriker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Can someone explain to me how requiring background checks for certain guns and preventing people on watch lists from buying guns infringes on any citizen's right to keep and bear arms?

I keep hearing this argument, and, frankly, it's a FoS argument.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Well it was a long day, but it looked as if the 2nd amendment to the constitution was once again not infringed upon.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

According to Some Interpretations of the Second Amendment , If taken Literally , Background Checks are in Reality , Unconstitutional . If that Is the Case , then Watch Lists are the Only Alternative for the U.S.Government to Take Action Against Possible Terrorists Threats to our Nation .



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

There is a background check for all guns, not just ARs or "assault weapons". Apparently, the JD has a list of their own that they're not sharing. The background check to buy a gun goes through NICS which would deny that purchase to anyone not allowed to buy firearms, such as felons.

www.fbi.gov...



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
ATS can get their collective panties out of a wad now. Whew.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
Can someone explain to me how requiring background checks for certain guns and preventing people on watch lists from buying guns infringes on any citizen's right to keep and bear arms?

I keep hearing this argument, and, frankly, it's a FoS argument.



You do realize that you are most likely on a terrorist watch list just by being a member of ATS- do you not?



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

I can Vouch for Him . He's OK , just Another Pissed Off American Citizen that wants to Fire the Clowns Running Our Beloved Country Right Now , and Have the DAMN RIGHT to Do So .
edit on 20-6-2016 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

No, you are "FoS" and being either willfully blind or don't care about your rights.

The No Gun list would violate numerous rights.
Because they want to use the secret and arbitrary "No Fly List" as the source for their "No Gun List"

1. There is no due process of law involved in being put on the no fly list.

2. You do not get informed when you are on the no fly list, you find out when you try to fly.

3. You are never informed of why you were put on the no fly list.

4. Getting removed from the no fly list requires you to prove your innocence to a bureaucrat not a judge or jury, and is a long and expensive process.

5. And the gun grabbers refused to allow the bill to be amended to allow due process of law into it.

So again, you are the one who is "FoS"
edit on 20-6-2016 by watchitburn because: numbers are hard



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join