A bill that would have required background checks for firearm sales at gun shows and on the Internet was voted down today in the Senate 54-46. News talk radio is a buzz with the news, along with online websites like Alex Jones. Check out the comment section — my guess is that the majority of these anonymous nut jobs couldn’t pass a back ground check and the only way they can get their hands on a weapon are gun shows and the Internet!
Pro-gun groups claim that such a law will not stop mass shootings. How do they know? If it won’t matter anyway, then why vote the bill down? I’ll tell you why — the NRA (along with other big name corporations) run this country via campaign finance. The NRA has unlimited dollars to buy votes — The NRA’s website shows that since 2005, corporations have given $19.8 million to $52.6 million — most of it from the firearms industry, and they will continue to do so unless there is serious campaign finance reform — which will happen when Hell freezes over!
The other argument is to blame the use of psychotropic drugs. “If the mentally ill didn’t take these drugs then we wouldn’t have these problems.” Hello! Back ground checks are meant to stop these people from buying firearms. Right now anyone with cash can buy as many weapons and ammunition as they want from gun shows and the Internet. Anyone! — No questions asked…no paper trail… nothing!
Then there is the same, tired argument and probably their favorite — Its my ” Second Amendment right”! I copied this comment off Jones site:
All this means is that their Sandy Hook false flag wasn’t strong enough.
They will now conduct many more, much worse false flag shootings so the next time they attempt to destroy the 2nd amendment, it will be a slam dunk.
That’s your typical pro-gun, nut job right there. Don’t you feel all warm and fuzzy that that person cares about your Second Amendment rights? — unless of course, you happen to be anything but Caucasian.
I copied this off the U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 113th Congress – 1stSession (2013) to show how all the gun related amendments did.
Vote | Date | Issue | Question | Result | Description |
00103 | 17-Apr | S. 649 | On the Amendment S.Amdt. 714 | Rejected | Lautenberg Amdt. No. 714; To regulate large capacity ammunition feeding devices. |
00102 | 17-Apr | S. 649 | On the Amendment S.Amdt. 720 | Rejected | Burr Amdt. No. 720; To protect the Second Amendment rights of veterans and their families. |
00101 | 17-Apr | S. 649 | On the Amendment S.Amdt. 711 | Rejected | Feinstein Amdt. No. 711; To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes. |
00100 | 17-Apr | S. 649 | On the Amendment S.Amdt. 719 | Rejected | Cornyn Amdt. No. 719; To allow reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms. |
00099 | 17-Apr | S. 649 | On the Amendment S.Amdt. 713 | Rejected | Leahy Amdt. No. 713; To increase public safety by punishing and deterring firearms trafficking. |
00098 | 17-Apr | S. 649 | On the Amendment S.Amdt. 725 | Rejected | Grassley Amdt. No. 725; To address gun violence, improve the availability of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, address mental illness in the criminal justice system, and end straw purchases and trafficking of illegal firearms, and for other purposes. |
00097 | 17-Apr | S. 649 | On the Amendment S.Amdt. 715 | Rejected | Manchin Amdt. No. 715; To protect Second Amendment rights, ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and provide a responsible and consistent background check process. |
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa told reporters that, “Expanded background checks would not have prevented Newtown. Criminals do not submit to background checks.” — No kidding Grassley! That’s exactly why criminals shop at gun shows because they do not need to show anything but cash! That’s the idea behind background checks — to make it harder for those people to get a gun.
Democratic Senators Mark Begich (Alaska), Max Baucus (Montana), Mark Pryor (Arkansas) and Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota) all voted against the proposal and Senate Majority Leader Harry Rei,d who said he supported the plan, switched to a “no” vote as well. WTF!?
The NRA likes to give letter grades to legislators when it comes to so-called ‘gun rights’ issues. I decided to give all those who voted against the amendment a letter “F” as in just another F**king corporate whore.
“Right now anyone with cash can buy as many weapons and ammunition as they want from gun shows and the Internet. Anyone! — No questions asked…no paper trail… nothing!”
Many states require background checks at gun shows – including California.
Thats right but Nevada and Arizona have looser laws and its only a few hours drive to bring those weapons across to California. Indiana has lax gun laws and they end up in Chicago. If it isn’t on the Federal level it doesn’t work.
Skally, please check out this link….http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html
You might be surprised how many state DO NOT require background checks for private gun sales.
I am not surprised – if the anti-gun nuts exempted close family from background checks it might get passed.
“That’s your typical pro-gun, nut job right there. Don’t you feel all warm and fuzzy that that person cares about your Second Amendment rights? — unless of course, you happen to be anything but Caucasian.”
What do you mean by that comment? You seem to be racist.
Most pro-gun nutjobs are racist and are afraid of anyone who is different, especially people of color. My comment was meant to be sacrcastic.
*Actually, you guys are a little off target. The two biggest constituencies of firearm training which includes competitive shooting events….and that are also members of the NRA are Phillipinos and Korean handgun shooters. They are dedicated and very very good at it.
Profiling the NRA as 72 year old white guys that hate black people…..is not exactly on target either.
We will not argue that the NRA is littered with a variety of nut jobs….but also
a great variety of 2nd Amendment ideologues….that want to teach their kids, wives and friends how to shoot and how to defend themselves – if they have to.
Not all angels…..not all devils……..with eight….you get egg roll…….you know?
The “why” of Reid switched his vote to “no” has to do with parliamentary procedure. Only someone who was on the winning side of a vote can later bring it up for reconsideration, so by doing so he was ensuring that if things somehow change he’d be able to bring the issue up again for a revote. That’s exactly what he’s supposed to do in such a situation.
He knew other Dems would vote “no.” He didn’t HAVE to vote no.
They might change their mind, but he’s the one who’d bring it back up if he thought it could pass — or maybe even bring it up again simply at the time it could cause maximum embarrassment. Voting “no” unless he’s going to win is the right move.
Give me a break. Not a single one of those Democrats who voted no is going to bring this up again.
This was about expanded background check. Nothing on gun restrictions. Nothing on magazine restrictions.
Obama said it best…they should be ashamed of themselves. And Greg, you should be ashamed of yourself for justifying their actions.
Begich, Baucus and Pryor up for re-election in 2014. Spineless, unprincipled politicos, all three of them.
Inge,
Please, provide some source for your statement.
“No kidding Grassley! That’s exactly why criminals shop at gun shows because they do not need to show anything but cash!”
http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-findings-on-officers-thoughts/
Even the front line for public safety, actual cops, think it’s ineffective. Only 14% thought it would be effective.
Carl,
http://www.gunshowundercover2009.org/
http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/gun-show-loophole
http://gunvictimsaction.org/fact-sheet/fact-sheet-gun-show-loophole-arms-criminals/
*Too complex comes to mind. The concepts employed by Congress are always
“too comprehensive”. This is why Arnold Failed with his three Initiatives…..when
Downtown Jerry Brown…..kept it simple and passed the ONE.
Background Checks could have been passed easily – if it had simply stated: All
rejected applications for firearm purchases…….for cause: Mental Disability or a
Prior Felony Conviction………would be prosecuted 100%…..and with the money
to required to complete those prosecutions.
Gun Control advocates always want “sweeping answers” and alway find sweeping
failures!
The Gun Show loop hole……applies in how many states? Not in CA. Diane should
have simply stated in her second formulated law: “Make all States of the Union meet
the CA Requirements for Gun Shows.”
Both laws would have passed without problem. But as usual, Congress always wants
“carve outs”, “exceptions” and “all emcompassing legislation”. That’s great when no
one is watching. When people are watching…..Congress has a problem.
If you think that universal background checks, banning certain guns, and limiting the capacity of magazines constitutes “sweeping” change, that says FAR more about the paranoia, the extremism, the intractability of your side than it does anything about ours.
whatever ……..
Now that’s a brilliant response. Who can argue with a teenage pout?
Ironically, some of the biggest democratic supporters of this bill were full fledged behind the Iraq war.
I find DI-FI’s outrage on this bill misplaced and requiring some introspection.
BAN THE BULLETS. Leave the second amendment intact.
You mean the part about a ‘well regulated militia”? That part of the 2nd?
“Gun Control advocates always want “sweeping answers” and always find sweeping
failures!”
Yup – if they would have settled for only NICS checks at gun shows they would have got that.
The U.S. Senate sees the big picture and kills Obama’s gun grab legislation.
The Big Picture:
“Obama Supplied Mercenaries To Kill Qaddafi”
April 18, 2013 • 11:02AM
http://larouchepac.com/node/26259
Obama believe its O.K. to murder U.S. citizens on American soil with drones.
Christians Face Their “Kristallnacht” Under Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood Tyranny Installed by Obama
April 12, 2013 • 11:59AM
http://larouchepac.com/node/26199
More at: http://larouchepac.com/obamawatch
It’s a good thing to not touch the 2nd Amendment with a psychopath in the White House.
Speaking of psychopaths…
Your quoting Lyndon Larouche??? I needed a good laugh today. Thanks Robert!
Is this the same Lyndon Larouche, the author of, “Beyond Psychoanalysis”, where he wrote that a worker’s persona had to be stripped away to arrive at a state he called “little me,” from which it would be possible to “rebuild their personalities around a new socialist identity? Is it that guy???
Matthew Warren bought his death weapon off the internet with a scratched off serial #. Did a state with strict background check laws help him stay alive?
I thought background checks just went through arrest records.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5729176_american-background-check-gun_.html