Its starting...Congressional Legislation

[sajidakh]

McConnelll getting on board:

McConnell signals Republicans willing to engage on limited gun measures 'directly related' to Uvalde

Sen. Mitch McConnell said he's asked Republicans to look into gun control measures in the wake of the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas this week.

www.usatoday.com

 

[Occam]

"Directly related" leaves it in the hands of the gun control zealots to show how the things they want to do would actually - through legislation, within constitutional bounds - directly impact the events that unfolded. That's a higher bar than Schumer's bunch will want to admit. McConnell has actually set a bit of a trap for Schumer on this.

 

[Mightydog]

Yea but Dimocraps will be Dimocraps!

 

[PO2012]

Let's put aside the Constitutional arguments related to the 2nd Amendment for a moment and just look at things from a purely practical perspective. Which is easier: disarming or otherwise seeking to coerce 50 - 100 million people who own guns and risking all the consequences that come with such a decision or incarcerating (either in prison or a locked psychiatric ward) the relatively small number of people responsible for the overwhelming majority of homicides and aggravated assaults committed with firearms? The answer is obvious.

I'm not interested in compromise because the defenders of the right to keep and bear arms end up making all the concessions and the other side does nothing but take ground.

The 2nd Amendment is equal to every other Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. If our side proposed stripping convicted felons of the right to an attorney, the right to trial by jury, the right to remain silent etc. would anyone even humor such legislation? We all know the answer. If you can make it a crime to possess a firearm after being convicted of, say, armed robbery, why can't you make it a crime to hire a lawyer to defend you as a convicted felon? Why not pass a law that anyone convicted of a violent felony no longer has the right to remain silent in any future interrogation and that if they refuse to answer questions put to them by Police they face an automatic five years without parole? We all know why such legislation would never even be introduced, much less passed into law. I view the arguments in favor of ERPOs, gun free zones, "assault weapons" bans and the like to be similarly ridiculous, counter-productive and illegitimate.

We need to stop compromising. We gain nothing, the enemies of freedom gain everything and the mass shootings continue. Enough with the politics. Just say "No." If you can't ban the practice of Islam because a certain number of people practice Jihad, you can't ban semi-automatic rifles because a certain number of mental cases and sociopaths kill school children.

 

[E.Shell]

...McConnell has actually set a bit of a trap for Schumer on this.

If McConnell ever set a trap for Schumer, it would only be so he could catch him and take him home.

 

[camo556]

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a leading advocate for expanded background checks, hosted seven colleagues in a basement office in the Capitol Thursday afternoon for what participants described as an “organizational” meeting.

Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) attended the meeting in person. Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) joined by telephone.

Nothing good happens in a basement Congressional office. I hear Clinton's used condom is still in there.

Bipartisan Senate group forms to break impasse on gun legislation

A small group of Democratic and Republican senators have formed a bipartisan negotiating group in hopes of reaching a modest deal on gun control legislation, but they don’t have much time to hammer…

thehill.com

 

[jc1240]

Yea but Dimocraps will be Dimocraps! View attachment 367491 View attachment 367492

Link to the article?

 

[welder516]

I believe something will be done to further restrictions on people that had no knowledge of the event.

 

[whistlersmother]

I believe something will be done to further restrictions on people that had no knowledge of the event.

And those people get nothing in return except the warm fuzzy feeling from gun control advocates that somehow this time will be different.

 

[Mightydog]

Link to the article?

Still can’t post a link but it was Fox News yesterday

 

[teratos]

We probably have to pass it to see what's in it. I bet the Republicans are more than willing to do UBC. Wouldn't be surprised if they make "assault weapons" NFA. We will get nothing in return.

 

[welder516]

We probably have to pass it to see what's in it. I bet the Republicans are more than willing to do UBC. Wouldn't be surprised if they make "assault weapons" NFA. We will get nothing in return.

To me it seems like the right climate after the school killings maybe their ages play into the terror of it. Now liberal society sees an opportunity to save lives when they let millions of babies die or be murdered.

I am appalled by both methods of killing .

 

[TheOriginalMexicanBob]

Nothing good happens in a basement Congressional office. I hear Clinton's used condom is still in there.

Bipartisan Senate group forms to break impasse on gun legislation

A small group of Democratic and Republican senators have formed a bipartisan negotiating group in hopes of reaching a modest deal on gun control legislation, but they don’t have much time to hammer…

thehill.com

Clinton used condoms? I thought he relied on blue dresses?

 

[eruby]

Clinton used condoms? I thought he relied on blue dresses?

..... Come again?

No, mustard

 

[camo556]

Clinton used condoms? I thought he relied on blue dresses?

Hillary, not Bill.

 

[TheOriginalMexicanBob]

Hillary is a carpet muncher...if she needed some kind of tongue condom (dental dam) then the other person isn't clean enough to waste time on. Or...is Hillary the one who needs the dental dam applied to protect the other person?

Either way...not something pleasant to think about.

 

[outrider58]

Link to the article?

This I think...

Schumer blocks Senate GOP school safety bill, angering Republicans

Republicans are calling Sen. Chuck Schumer a liar after he blocked a school safety bill Wednesday that he claimed could put "more guns in schools."

www.foxnews.com

 

[chilipeppermaniac]

I believe something will be done to further restrictions on people that had no knowledge of the event.

Like me when I innocently went to my Pa. place of enjoyment held every Jan 1. Weherly's Gun Auction.

Pretty sure it was 2014. I could not resist a pretty sharp looking Glock 23-c. As per the typical process, the proper forms, transfer to Md ffl, etc, I won the bidding, paid for the gun, then waited for it to be shipped to Brownstone Trading Co. Westminster Md.

When I called to talk to Brad, Mrs Vosberg asked me, do I have my handgun permit? At this, I asked her what she meant?
Long story short, this is when I learned ( was educated of the " had no knowledge of the event" FREAKING HQL went into force 2013. SON OF A BITCH @ now the extra costs and hassles of A-HOLE MD Law makers.

Despite the hassle, I am confident I made a good purchase in my first Glock and first 40 SW.

 

[Boats]

"Never let a crisis go to waste"

 

[Boats]

Let's put aside the Constitutional arguments related to the 2nd Amendment for a moment and just look at things from a purely practical perspective. Which is easier: disarming or otherwise seeking to coerce 50 - 100 million people who own guns and risking all the consequences that come with such a decision or incarcerating (either in prison or a locked psychiatric ward) the relatively small number of people responsible for the overwhelming majority of homicides and aggravated assaults committed with firearms? The answer is obvious.

I'm not interested in compromise because the defenders of the right to keep and bear arms end up making all the concessions and the other side does nothing but take ground.

The 2nd Amendment is equal to every other Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. If our side proposed stripping convicted felons of the right to an attorney, the right to trial by jury, the right to remain silent etc. would anyone even humor such legislation? We all know the answer. If you can make it a crime to possess a firearm after being convicted of, say, armed robbery, why can't you make it a crime to hire a lawyer to defend you as a convicted felon? Why not pass a law that anyone convicted of a violent felony no longer has the right to remain silent in any future interrogation and that if they refuse to answer questions put to them by Police they face an automatic five years without parole? We all know why such legislation would never even be introduced, much less passed into law. I view the arguments in favor of ERPOs, gun free zones, "assault weapons" bans and the like to be similarly ridiculous, counter-productive and illegitimate.

We need to stop compromising. We gain nothing, the enemies of freedom gain everything and the mass shootings continue. Enough with the politics. Just say "No." If you can't ban the practice of Islam because a certain number of people practice Jihad, you can't ban semi-automatic rifles because a certain number of mental cases and sociopaths kill school children.

This x100

well said.