Senate Currently Debating New Gun Control Bill, Background Checks Likely To Fail

news.yahoo.com...

The Senate is currently debating the gun bill. The first votes on amendments are expected to be cast around 4pm, just a couple hours from now. At the moment, it dosent look like the bill will pass, or atleast the background check part.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A bipartisan effort to expand background checks faced almost certain defeat Wednesday as the Senate approached a long-awaited vote on the linchpin of the drive to curb gun violence. As the showdown drew near, an Associated Press-GfK poll showed ebbing public support for tightening gun control laws.

With the roll call just hours away, two more senators — Republican Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Democrat Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota — declared they opposed the background check measure. Their announcements, along with opposition from other Republicans and some moderate Democrats, left supporters heading toward defeat unless they could turn votes around in the final hours, a near impossible task.

From another source : The NRA Wins: The Senate Gun Bill Is All But Dead

In regards to the Manchin-Toomey gun show background check bill....

This morning, Manchin conceded defeat.

Inside the main bill, the Schumer universal background check part is almost certainly going to cause the entire defeat of the bill, unless it is amended out.

The main bill, which will be considered after all of the amendments, includes three parts: an increase in school safety funding, tighter laws around trafficking firearms, and the expansive Schumer bakcground check bill. If that last proposal isn't amended out, it's not likely that the package will pass.

Even if this somehow magically passes, the House isnt expected to pass it, or pass anything gun realted.

Failure to pass even compromise legislation in the Senate makes it highly unlikely that the House will pass anything advocates find palatable — if the House passes anything at all.

Still time to flood the dc switchboards and put your reps to task over this... unless everyone is distracted say by the arrest of bombing suspect.

I have been calling and emailing. These proposals are UnConstitutional and need to be voted down.

Crickets in this thread... Guess everyone too busy with the bombing to be concerned with the several pieces of legislation with life altering implications about to go up for a vote in the government...

Funny how that works.

reply to post by benrl


If this bill does get defeated later today, I wouldnt be suprised if the MSM just brushes this under the rug.

"Gun bill defeated?...shhhh, much more exciting news out there today"....and then it's back to the same old same old. Maybe this gun debate will just fade away after today, or the next couple days....and hopefully the prices on ammo will finally fall to pre-panic levels to.

The Senate?

It's likely to pass forget the current make up of people in the Senate?

Nothing but a bunch people who believe in the supremacy of their own power, and glory.

Well, the votes on the amendments are being taken right now. The totals should be up within a couple minutes. (Figures I have to leave for work in literally a minute)


ETA 2 - Go and figure that clown Mccain voted yes for this....Arizona needs to vote that clown out.


ETA 3 - Suprised Reid voted no for this. (Im watching it live on cspan)

The amendment is shot down narrowly!!!!!

54 yay 46 nay.

Again, this amandment is DEFEATED!

(Now it's on to the Cruz amendment, but im off to work now)

reply to post by buni11687


YAY!

People want their Rights!

"Boo-yah"

gunssavelives.net... well the bill is dead for the time being and here is a list of how some voted so we can rember this during the next election cycle

Might as well post this in here also. Im glad all these anti gun amendments have been defeated.

Here is what bothers me about this. The response from Senators and the President who are to abide by the Constitution and I would hope, have an understanding of it.

This was an amendment to a bill in the Senate. The Senate, known as the Upper House, is the House of the States; not the People. Yet all the language from those who 'lost' today, speak to how the "people" were not heard.

This is a win for the States and their sovereignty. It speaks loudly that they will deal with the details on how to handle the Second Amendment; not some 'one-size-fits-all' package the Administration feels we need.

A few quotes that should make anyone who understands Federalism go "what?"

According to Politico, President Obama states:

Senators on both sides of the aisle “caved to the pressure and started looking for an excuse, any excuse, to say no,” he said, adding that he planned to continue pushing on the issue.

Or they are looking out for the States that elected them; even if it is via mandated popular elections. Senators are beholden to the States, not the People. If they weren't, why have a bicameral House?

Still from Politico, this time, Vice-President Biden:

“This is going to be a close vote, but I can assure you one thing. That were going to get this eventually, we’re going to get this eventually. If we don’t get it today, we’re going to get it eventually. Because I think the American people are way ahead of their elected officials.”

Mr. Vice President sir, the People will speak in the House of Representatives. As for the Senate, in which you reside, the States have spoken for their People respectively.

Some of the better quotes:
Obama:

A minority in the U.S. Senate decided it wasn’t worth it.

Well sir it seems that a majority of them didn't like the bill, so no matter how you want to spin it, the minority that followed the majority equals a majority.

Here is the emotional appeal, which frankly should be just as excluded as a religious appeal in my opinion:

Sooner or later, we are going to get this right. The memories of these children demand it.

Sorry again sir, this was the State's rejecting an amendment in the Senate; not the People. And this guy supposedly taught Constitutional Law? On that note, I guess Constitutionalism and Constitutional law can be two separate things.