The Gun Control Fight Has Just Begun.....

This is a discussion on The Gun Control Fight Has Just Begun..... within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Now is not the time to let our guard down........ Keep in mind what was defeated were only amendments to S.649....... Reid pulls gun bill ...

Results 1 to 9 of 9
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By ccw9mm

Thread: The Gun Control Fight Has Just Begun.....

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761

    The Gun Control Fight Has Just Begun.....

    Now is not the time to let our guard down........ Keep in mind what was defeated were only amendments to S.649.......

    Reid pulls gun bill from consideration
    This debate is not over, in fact this fight is just beginning,” Reid said on the Senate floor Thursday.(April 18th) “We’re going to come back to this bill,” Reid said.

    The underlying bill hasn’t been defeated and is still technically on the legislative calendar. As majority leader, Reid can bring up the bill again at a moment’s notice.
    Reid pulls gun bill from consideration
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,245
    Reid, Feinstein, Schumer, Obama, Blumenthal, Murphy and all the rest have ALL publicly stated they're gunnin' for all of us and that they won't let gun-grabbing rest until they get the guns. Straight for the horses' mouths.

    We need to push for crime control, not some garbled trickle-down pile of unrelated wishes that are cloaked in the guise of a crime bill that amounts to an unconstitutional destruction of the liberty of all citizens. WE are better than that. We must demand and require that they be better than that, and refuse to accept any less.

    KEEP THE HEAT ON. The liberty-haters are planning the next evisceration. Coming to a legislature near you. If we're not careful to eject them and their hateful policies: coming to a doorstep near you.
    40Cal365 likes this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    6,542
    Does it still require a 60% vote to pass if re-introduced? Or can a quorum (51 senators present) pass the legislation?

    I knew that he was pulling it, which is why he voted against it... I knew he could reintroduce it... so now the question remains, can he tack it on to he immigration bill, the budget, or some other bill, can he relabel it after changing a word or two?

    What low life sneaky attack can they pull to get it voted on?
    Politicians, take note of Colorado 9/10/2013.
    "You are elected to service, not power.
    Your job is to "serve us" not to lord power over us."
    Me, 9/11/13

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member
    Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,952
    The 60 vote rule was instituted by Harry Reid for this bill. This type of bill would not nomrally require 60 votes. He used it to raise the threshhold for any pro-gun amendments. As scared as he and Schumer were that the pro-gun amendments would pass, I don't see him lowering the threshhold at all.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    Does it still require a 60% vote to pass if re-introduced? Or can a quorum (51 senators present) pass the legislation?

    I knew that he was pulling it, which is why he voted against it... I knew he could reintroduce it... so now the question remains, can he tack it on to he immigration bill, the budget, or some other bill, can he relabel it after changing a word or two?

    What low life sneaky attack can they pull to get it voted on?
    You bring up some good questions.... I do believe it will still need the 60 votes to pass, which is hopeful news for us........
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  7. #6
    Member Array zonzin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Peoples Protectorate of Kaliforniya, gulag NorCal
    Posts
    97
    They just need 51 votes to pass and send to the house. But, they need 60 to stop a filibuster that would effectively kill the bill. The threat of the filibuster is why they had to go for 60.
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ - Second Amendment T-Shirts

    ΜΟΛΩΝ-ΛΑΒΕ - Go Greek. Lifetime member Kappa Kappa Bang (KKB) Fraternity

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    6,542
    Quote Originally Posted by zonzin View Post
    They just need 51 votes to pass and send to the house. But, they need 60 to stop a filibuster that would effectively kill the bill. The threat of the filibuster is why they had to go for 60.
    Does the 51 apply if it is reintroduced? or does the 60 apply?

    Because of the fact that Reid pulled the bill, it can be re-introduced... in order for him to have the ability to reintroduce it he had to vote against it, which he did... and then he pulled it from consideration instead of letting it die.
    Politicians, take note of Colorado 9/10/2013.
    "You are elected to service, not power.
    Your job is to "serve us" not to lord power over us."
    Me, 9/11/13

  9. #8
    Senior Member Array RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    976
    Why are no bills introduced that BAN any further restrictions?
    How about something similar to double jeopardy? Bill failed? Do not re-introduce.

    Must we continue to fight the exact same fight over and over and over? If so, we will eventually lose.
    Perhaps it's time for more offense and less defense. Drive them back to the river and drown them.
    "When those who are governed do too little, those who govern can, and will, do too much." Ronald Reagan

    Do what you can; then do what you must

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    6,542
    Quote Originally Posted by RightsEroding View Post
    Why are no bills introduced that BAN any further restrictions?
    How about something similar to double jeopardy? Bill failed? Do not re-introduce.

    Must we continue to fight the exact same fight over and over and over? If so, we will eventually lose.
    Perhaps it's time for more offense and less defense. Drive them back to the river and drown them.
    Ya know, Hopyard has suggested the very same thing... Most here ignore that suggestion... But the reality is, just as surely as this bill (and it's amendments that failed) did not pass this time, such a bill would never pass...

    There is legislation that has passed that should have stopped all of these bills... and it has an amendment in it which also was ratified... the amendment ends: "... shall not be infringed."
    Politicians, take note of Colorado 9/10/2013.
    "You are elected to service, not power.
    Your job is to "serve us" not to lord power over us."
    Me, 9/11/13

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •