Forum Thread

Gun Law Vote

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 48 1 2 3 4 Next
  • Democrat
    Connecticut
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Concerning the Gun Law:
    To cut to the mustard: Is it possible for citizens of any one state to vote yea for the gun issue that their elected officials are voting no for, to go over those officials heads and have it count instead of that officials negative vote? What would it take, besides having to wait until election time for these officials to be voted out of their seats whenever they are not reflecting what their districts want of them? I understand that some of them are so afraid of loosing their jobs if they go against the NRA; but if I were in the senate or the house and I knew my district wanted background checks for everyone, that is the way I would vote. They all forget that they are public servants.They worry only about themselves.They want transparency from President Obama, I would demand the same from them.I would like to know, which ones voted no on background checks. Be accountable to your district. If 90% of America wants this to pass, someone isn't doing their job.
  • Independent
    Alamo, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    It’s time to move on and get this job done in the individual states. The laws in NY and CT are far better than we have accomplished in our inert, “Do Nothing” congress.
    We should strive to have “Safe” states, such as NY and CT. Eventually we would have “Safe” and “Unsafe States”. Individuals could determine where they vacation, send their children to college, and conduct commerce based on "Safe” state status. The economic pressure may be the only thing that will make the changes for the sane gun laws we demand. How long could Alaska and North Dakota exist with no vacationers, out of state college students or commerce from “Safe” states?
  • Independent
    Dover, TN
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I can only assume the safe States are the ones that firearms are least controlled in. That being, criminals could care less what laws you pass, any law placing more restrictions, only restrict law abiding citizens. You could ban all firearm ownership in your beloved state and that would be the next play ground for criminals. How many times must one repeat a lesson before it's learned? Apparently many for some. Prohibition of any commodity/item/act there is a demand for is destin to fail. Prohibition laws only invite criminal behavior. Background checks have been mandatory in my state for close to 20 years, They do not inhibit anyone from purchasing a firearm. If everyone hasn't noticed there is a black market for any need or want.
  • Center Left Democrat
    Democrat
    Flagstaff, AZ
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The Brady Center just released the list of senators who voted against the bill. If you'd like to call them, the list is posted below:

    Sen. Ayotte: 202-224-3324
    Sen. Baucus: 202-224-2651
    Sen. Begich: 202-224-3004
    Sen. Heitkamp: 202-224-2043
    Sen. Heller: 202-224-6244

    Sen. Pryor: 202-224-2353
    Sen. Murkowski: (202) 224-6665
    Sen. Flake: (202) 224-4521
    Sen. Chambliss: (202) 224-3521
    Sen. Coats: (202) 224-5623
    Sen. Grassley: (202) 224-3744
    Sen. Burr: (202) 224-3154
    Sen. Heitkamp : (202) 224-2043
    Sen. Portman: (202) 224-3353


    I've already posted my disappointment with Jeff Flake on his Facebook page, and will be calling his office tomorrow.

  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    http://thomas.loc.gov/home/rollcallvotes.html
    website for Library of Congress recording via Thomas.

    Senate Bill S.649 had several admendments (711,713,714,715, 719,720). All amendments were voted separately and all appears similarly to the bill in its entirety. Below is a vote on one of the amendments. If you question the other amendments go to the website and see for yourself.
    On the Amendment (Manchin Amdt. No. 715 )
    Vote Number: 97 Vote Date: April 17, 2013, 04:04 PM
    Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected
    Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 715 to S. 649 (Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of2013)

    Statement: 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.
    Vote Counts: YEAs 54 NAYs 46

    Alphabetical by Senator Name
    Alexander (R-TN), Nay
    Ayotte (R-NH), Nay
    Baldwin (D-WI), Yea
    Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
    Baucus (D-MT), Nay
    Begich (D-AK), Nay
    Bennet (D-CO), Yea
    Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea
    Blunt (R-MO), Nay
    Boozman (R-AR), Nay
    Boxer (D-CA), Yea
    Brown (D-OH), Yea
    Burr (R-NC), Nay
    Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
    Cardin (D-MD), Yea
    Carper (D-DE), Yea
    Casey (D-PA), Yea
    Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
    Coats (R-IN), Nay
    Coburn (R-OK), Nay
    Cochran (R-MS), Nay
    Collins (R-ME), Yea
    Coons (D-DE), Yea
    Corker (R-TN), Nay
    Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
    Cowan (D-MA), Yea
    Crapo (R-ID), Nay
    Cruz (R-TX), Nay
    Donnelly (D-IN), Yea
    Durbin (D-IL), Yea
    Enzi (R-WY), Nay
    Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
    Fischer (R-NE), Nay
    Flake (R-AZ), Nay Franken (D-MN), Yea
    Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea
    Graham (R-SC), Nay
    Grassley (R-IA), Nay
    Hagan (D-NC), Yea
    Harkin (D-IA), Yea
    Hatch (R-UT), Nay
    Heinrich (D-NM), Yea
    Heitkamp (D-ND), Nay
    Heller (R-NV), Nay
    Hirono (D-HI), Yea
    Hoeven (R-ND), Nay
    Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
    Isakson (R-GA), Nay
    Johanns (R-NE), Nay
    Johnson (D-SD), Yea
    Johnson (R-WI), Nay
    Kaine (D-VA), Yea
    King (I-ME), Yea
    Kirk (R-IL), Yea
    Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
    Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
    Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
    Leahy (D-VT), Yea
    Lee (R-UT), Nay
    Levin (D-MI), Yea
    Manchin (D-WV), Yea
    McCain (R-AZ), Yea
    McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
    McConnell (R-KY), Nay
    Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
    Merkley (D-OR), Yea
    Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
    Moran (R-KS), Nay Murkowski (R-AK), Nay
    Murphy (D-CT), Yea
    Murray (D-WA), Yea
    Nelson (D-FL), Yea
    Paul (R-KY), Nay
    Portman (R-OH), Nay
    Pryor (D-AR), Nay
    Reed (D-RI), Yea
    Reid (D-NV), Nay
    Risch (R-ID), Nay
    Roberts (R-KS), Nay
    Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
    Rubio (R-FL), Nay
    Sanders (I-VT), Yea
    Schatz (D-HI), Yea
    Schumer (D-NY), Yea
    Scott (R-SC), Nay
    Sessions (R-AL), Nay
    Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
    Shelby (R-AL), Nay
    Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
    Tester (D-MT), Yea
    Thune (R-SD), Nay
    Toomey (R-PA), Yea
    Udall (D-CO), Yea
    Udall (D-NM), Yea
    Vitter (R-LA), Nay
    Warner (D-VA), Yea
    Warren (D-MA), Yea
    Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
    Wicker (R-MS), Nay
    Wyden (D-OR), Yea
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Central, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Almost strictly by party vote. The red states Nay the south Nay
  • Independent
    el paso, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Guns or no guns. This is america and we have a constitution and the 2nd amendment is the right to bear arms. Fine , many people dislike guns but they are here. If you let them take them away then whats stopping them from freedom of speech or freedom of press. If we let one of these backwards left leaning juviniles win this debate then we have lost the game.
    Wake Up America......................................................
  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The gun vote is not a threat against the 2nd admendment. There is so much lies going on about the gun vote that it's compared to the lions and Christians in the colleseum. The lions are the NRA and the gun manufacturers advocating no to any control on guns. Let the people buy what they want and shoot who they want. The 2nd admendment was not intended for this. The gun vote should be about enhancing control on who can purchase, own and have a right to own a gun and being slight in mind, a criminal background, and identified as threat to the population. Existing laws should be enhanced to hold liable anybody that owns a gun if that gun/weapon is used by someone else killing a citizen or person with accidental/criminal intent. Why did that gun get in the hands of that child or adult handling it? The gun itself is not the problem, the person that owns it, fires it and uses it in a unsafe manner causing pain, suffering or death of human being. Registry of all weapons is necessary, so that law enforcement may identify the legal owner and investigate any acts of criminal or accidental shooting. Owning a weapon such as gun is a large responsibility and everybody needs to realize that our country allows you to own a weapon, just not a criminal or a person with a mentally condition identified unsafe to be around weapons.

    The NRA and big business is pooring large amounts of cash into many political pockets. I assume they can't continue this because 90% of America wants gun control. Like Obama said this afternoon, this is just "Round 1". There's more to come on this and I anticipate America will be satisfied when the money dries up from the NRA and politicians will have to decide what their respective districts wants them to vote. Americans are not done, yet, "We have not begun to fight" is the call and a new gun control vote will be forthcoming. Gun Control voting will continue until America is satisfied. I can also forecast that the NRA may become minimized because of members leaving their fold. All the talk about increased members is not telling the truth about the thousands that are leaving. Another trait of the NRA is the "Lie". Good for you, Obama for calling out the NRA as liars.
  • Independent
    el paso, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Lieing about what? Why pass a law on back round checks whene we already have that. Sad that libs always lie to get what they want. Shows that there agenda is BS.....
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I don't know where this 90% figure for gun control comes from, unless they are using the figures that were reportedly used about the number of citizens wanting some kind of background checks,not just the one that was proposed, besides it hard to decide who is lying to whom.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    hollister Wrote: Lieing about what? Why pass a law on back round checks whene we already have that. Sad that libs always lie to get what they want. Shows that there agenda is BS.....
    I guess you still live in the stone age; never heard of normal civil liberties; gun owners like you are totally insecure and even with words you prove the saying: either my way or the highway. Sorry there are more people on this world than you, who need protection; likely not by guns but with education and food.
  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Look at JustFacts.com at www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp


    The facts on gun shows shows little/no control on sellers, which is why they can sell guns to individuals with no questions asked.

    A gun show is an exhibition or gathering where guns, gun parts, ammunition, gun accessories, and literature are displayed, bought, sold, traded, and discussed."[90]



    * Roughly 2,000-5,200 gun shows take place in the United States each year.[91]



    * Gun shows "provide a venue for the sale and exchange of firearms by federal firearms licensees (FFLs).... Such shows also are a venue for private sellers who buy and sell firearms for their personal collections or as a hobby. In these situations, the sellers are not required to have a federal firearms license. Although federal firearms laws apply to both FFLs and private sellers at gun shows, private sellers, unlike FFLs, are under no legal obligation to ask purchasers whether they are legally eligible to buy guns or to verify purchasers' legal status through background checks...."[92]



    * In the three-year period from October 2003 through September 2006, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) conducted 202 operations at 195 gun shows, leading to 121 arrests and 83 convictions (with some cases still pending as of June 2007).[93]



    * A 1997 U.S. Justice Department survey of 14,285 state prison inmates found that among those inmates who carried a firearm during the offense for which they were sent to jail, 0.7% obtained the firearm at a gun show, 1% at a flea market, 3.8% from a pawn shop, 8.3% from a retail store, 39.2% through an illegal/street source, and 39.6% through family or friends.[94]
  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Response to Jonnycee, see pollingreport.com/guns.htm

    "Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or online?"
    3/13 & earlier: "Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows?"


    Support % Oppose % Unsure %
    4/11-14/13 86 13 1
    3/7-10/13 91 8 1
    1/10-13/13 88 11 1
    5/00 92 6 2
    8/30 - 9/2/99 90 9 1
    5/99 89 11 -


    Why Congress (Senate) did not approve more background checks, is clear that NRA money talks. Well, we are going to see the NRA run out of money and/or politicians will start listening to America. Like Obama said this is "Round 1".
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I said that most of America supports some type of weapons background checks, just not the one that this administration proposed, you take a poll with a generalized question and then publish the results as if the question was about the proposed fun legistration, which is disingenous to the public. Find out why it was rejected, ,and no it wasn't about money,probably more about their own re-election chances, than go from there, the public wants background checks, which includes denying the mentally ill from obtaining legal weapons, but the mentally ill have rights of privacy under the HIPPA Act, criminals already have a file to refer to when needed,so that Law is already on the books,so that leaves the mentally ill question,that is where your debates should begin.
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Central, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee wrote: I said that most of America supports some type of weapons background checks, just not the one that this administration proposed.

    OK I'm curious..... what was it about the background checks proposed by this administration that you objected to ? Please enlighten us all.