Dems stage sit-in on House floor to push for gun vote

For those that DO care.

Over just the past five years, lawmakers have introduced more than 100 gun control proposals in Congress, since Gabrielle Giffords and 18 other people were shot in Tucson, Arizona in January 2011.

Why more than 100 gun control proposals in Congress since 2011 have failed

Let that sink in for a moment people.

OVER 100 gun control proposals since 2011.

OVER 100 EPIC FAILS.

a reply to: neo96

I am willing to bet it has something to do with that pesky Constitution making everything so hard again.

a reply to: JetBlackStare

Here is the thing.

The terrorism frankly isn't a huge part of the gun stats in the us. You can say that's harsh to victims or whatever.

I can say it's harsh that the poor kids that gunned down daily from gang stuff is completely out of the discussion. If you don't fight for them don't use he stats of how bad gun violence is. Especially from rifles.

The national discussion should be focused on social issues.

If you want to address guns first make illegal gun sweeps. That means cleaning up the dirty police forces in places like baltimore, Philly, Chicago etc where drug dealers and cops are joined at the hip, with bussiness, and even politicians.

If you want to talk guns its hand guns. I think many gun owners could talk about gun safety/public health issues that happen with concealable arms. I shoot once a week which lets me know how hard shooting a hand gun really is. I have done all kinds of target and stress shooting and it's hard. So I can see a discussion about being capable of using the weapons. Going through the process of being proficient at shooting would probably push people away from having one because people are lazy and don't want to actually be able to shoot a hand gun well. If they haven't gone through the training maybe they shouldn't have one? Maybe that's too much.

The outdoor range I go to has Olympic style handgun courses and tactical bays for practicing drawing.

They have law enforcement style range obstacles for 3 gun races and law enforcement training

I can tell you shooting a hand gun in motion and under stress is the hardest of the three guns. So maybe 21 year olds who can carry on campus in Texas isn't a good idea without a more rigorous marksmanship test.

But magazine sizes and rifle restrictions are very much a 2nf amendment issue.

Putting people on lists should be done with a lot of scrutiny if at all. If the people are a real threat there is probably evidence.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: neo96

I am willing to bet it has something to do with that pesky Constitution making everything so hard again.

But,but,but the country 'want's it!!!!!!!!

a reply to: neo96

"Think of the Children" will be next, right? Isn't that the next numbered item on the script?

a reply to: neo96

Hey neo does the co situation lay out a process of amending?

Was the 10th (one of those unchangeable amendments ) altered and reinterpreted?

Did the 18th get cancelled?

Stop pretending its treason to question the government.

I am on your side (sort of) in respects to no gun laws. However your need to silence opposition reaks of totalitarian ideology.

The forefathers didn't write the bible. The wrote a living document that can be changed. So maybe you should do a better job debating before the libs a quite that 2/3 vote. It may only be a decade away.

a reply to: luthier

How about the proponents of gun control STOP trolling the country.

According to Feinstein she doesn't need an amendment process.

They would probably be better off to debate as opposed to this. Then again think this shows further more that they truly have nothing to offer with what they are pushing.

As of 1:30 AM EST this is still going on.

a reply to: neo96

People, please... why do you think these politicians want gun control? Does anyone on this site REALLY think these politicians give two spits about any of us? We can see by their actions that they consistently DO NOT represent us. They do NOTHING to better our lives or the world, and yet everyone continues to buy into the nonsense.

If we ALL agree that our system is broken and does not represent us, why do we think that a bunch of political posturing has anything to do with helping us or keeping us safe.

THINK ONCE IN A WHILE.

a reply to: neo96


Then I guess the USA is not ready for my idea of only shipping guns to law enforcement and the military. That day is coming though. We're just not advanced enough to apply simple solutions yet.

Democrats aren't heroes for throwing a tantrum demanding not just our guns, but our due process and all the rights that protect that due process.

I'm tired of democrats. Truly.

As someone who once stood with democrats against the Draconian legislation introduced and passed in the wake of 9.11 and hailed by the right as a matter of solid national security.

Those tools we gave them are now being used on the American people and the liberal/democrat side are now cheering on what they once stood against as a matter of principle.

I guess rights don't effing matter once you wanna win elections, eh?

To Democrats and liberals, listen up! The bill of rights isn't limited to the 1st and 2nd amendments. We have the 5th and 14th that outline due process and then there's the 4th which outlines what that due process should look like.

Today we are not just talking about infringing on the second. We are talking about doing away with due process altogether. Those democrats staging a sit in? They're doing that because they want to remove the presumption of innocence from American jurisprudence because they hate guns that much.

If you think the consequences of this end only at the steps of the NRA or only at my feet as a gun owner, you're going to be in for a very rude awakening.

You know when people say "know one is coming for your guns" ... well these are the very people who are coming for your guns. Anyone who says different is just willfully ignorant.

a reply to: neo96

I guess they miss the good ol days back in the 60's at Berkley.

Bet they wanted to pass a joint around and sing songs.

Combine this with the AG saying we need to fight terror with love and we can start a national love-in.

a reply to: dismanrc

Combine this with the AG saying we need to fight terror with love and we can start a national love-in.

That was one of the dumbest things I've ever heard a US cabinet level official say about our enemies.

I'll send them my love at 2700 FPS.

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
Why do guns owners act like the 2nd amendment is set in stone? It has the word amendment, which means the fore fathers thought that at some point it and other amendments may need to be changed with the times.

And until that date IT IS SET IN STONE.

Don't like it? Get a Constitutional Convention together and change it.

By the way ---good luck with that.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
Why do guns owners act like the 2nd amendment is set in stone? It has the word amendment, which means the fore fathers thought that at some point it and other amendments may need to be changed with the times.

Why do journalists act like the First Amendment is set in stone?

All except the freedom of religion part of course. That part doesn't count if you affend someone with you religion. (OPPS I forgot to say your Christian religion.)

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Thats horsecrap.

There is an amendment process. Any article in the constitution can be changed and our forefathers created that.

If they want to protest something dumb that's perfectly fine. Hopefully the public will know better.

If they don't. We will have to be the ones doing it.

However I seriously doubt 2/3 of the states are going to vote in their favor.

Protest and debate should be encouraged not discouraged just because you disagree with it.

The categorical imparitive man.

They will use the Supreme Court soon to get around the constitution.


You do mean a 4-4 right? Seeing as Scalia accidentally died with his head under a pillow. (Oh and no ME examine. Ummm Prince got an ME exam just because signer. But a SC judge? Why bother.)
Amendments are so old school. Who needs 2/3rds when a 5-4 vote by appointees is so much easier.

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Thats horsecrap.

There is an amendment process. Any article in the constitution can be changed and our forefathers created that.

If they want to protest something dumb that's perfectly fine. Hopefully the public will know better.

If they don't. We will have to be the ones doing it.

However I seriously doubt 2/3 of the states are going to vote in their favor.

Protest and debate should be encouraged not discouraged just because you disagree with it.

The categorical imparitive man.

They will use the Supreme Court soon to get around the constitution.

Amendments are so old school. Who needs 2/3rds when a 5-4 vote by appointees is so much easier.

You do mean a 4-4, right? Seeing as how Scalia accendently died with his head under a pillow. (And no ME exam ether. Prince got an ME exam...)