[Dan from MI]

I keep hearing in the press and elsewhere about the democrats abandoning gun control. I'm a little more than skeptical about this for four major reasons.

H.R.1312 - To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes. This was in 2005, the current congress.

This was Carolyn McCarthy's present to us. It was not up for a vote, but did get 94 cosponsors. All of them are democrats, mostly from big cities, Massachusetts, or California. John Conyers (thank you Detroit :rolleyes: ), likely judiciary chair cosponsored this, so heads up there. Rahm Emanuel who led the DCC cosponsored this as well. So did Steny Hoyer, the new whip in the house.

I see two interesting names here in the cosponsor list.
Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] - 4/28/2005, Rep Miller, Brad [NC-13] - 4/28/2005 - Can we send those two anti-freedom individuals home? Those are democrat leaning district, but Bush won the Miller district in 2000.

On the Senate side, there are three presents the dems gave us.

From 2005:

S645 from Frank Lautenberg and S620 from Dianne Feinstein.
S645 had 11 cosponsors, all democrats (Including Hillary and Chris Dodd both rumored to want to be president). S620 has 10 cosponsors - 8 democrats and 2 republicans (Defeated DeWine and John Warner). The rest are the usual suspects.

S Amend 1615 from Ted Kennedy banning all centerfire ammunition (the infamous 30-30 ban)
31 YEAS, 64 NAYS, 5 no votes.

The Yea votes
Akaka (D-HI) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Boxer (D-CA) Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI) Clinton (D-NY) Corzine (D-NJ) Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) Harkin (D-IA) Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Obama (D-IL) Reed (D-RI) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY) Stabenow (D-MI) Wyden (D-OR)

Good Riddance to RINO Chafee. Those yea votes include "moderate" Evan Bayh, "pro-gun" Russ Feingold, the next big thing in Barack Obama, as well as Hillary, Biden, Lenin, and the usual jokers. To their credits, some democrats did vote against this piece of trash. Dorgan, Byrd (although he supported it the first time), Baucus, Bingaman, Pryor, Ben Nelson, Reid, Salazar, Conrad, Johnson, Leahy, and Lincoln

From 2004:

S Amdt 2619 - Kennedy's 30-30 ban
YEAs ---34
Akaka (D-HI) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Boxer (D-CA) Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI) Clinton (D-NY) Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN) Dodd (D-CT) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (D-FL) Harkin (D-IA) Hollings (D-SC) Inouye (D-HI) Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (D-CT)
Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Reed (D-RI) Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY) Stabenow (D-MI) Wyden (D-OR)

I noticed the "Good Southern Democrat" Hollings vote for this trash. Byrd voted for this too, as did "pro-gun" Feingold. The rest are the same old song and dance. That's an easy vote to oppose too. The other two are where the going gets tough.

S.Amdt. 2636 - The McCain gun show ban.

YEAs ---53
Akaka (D-HI) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA)
Breaux (D-LA) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY) Conrad (D-ND) Corzine (D-NJ) Daschle (D-SD) Dayton (D-MN)
DeWine (R-OH) Dodd (D-CT) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Edwards (D-NC)
Feingold (D-WI) Feinstein (D-CA) Fitzgerald (R-IL) Graham (D-FL) Hagel (R-NE) Harkin (D-IA) Hollings (D-SC) Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY) Stabenow (D-MI) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

The only democrats to vote no - Max Baucus, Zell Miller, and Ben Nelson. Tim Johnson missed the vote. "Pro-gun" Democrats like Pryor, Lincoln, Landrieu, Reid, Feingold, Dorgan, Conrad, Bingaman, and Byrd all voted the party line.

As for the GOP, Chafee, DeWine, and Fitzgerald are all gone. Hagel, Lugar, McCain, Voinovich, and John Warner are still problems. That said, 43 Republicans out of then 51 voted right. 3 Democrats did, and this was in 2004.
One more. The Ugly Gun/AW Ban S.Amdt. 2637
Akaka (D-HI) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA)
Breaux (D-LA) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Corzine (D-NJ) Daschle (D-SD)
Dayton (D-MN) DeWine (R-OH) Dodd (D-CT) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL)
Edwards (D-NC) Feinstein (D-CA) Fitzgerald (R-IL) Graham (D-FL) Gregg (R-NH) Harkin (D-IA) Hollings (D-SC) Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lugar (R-IN) Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA) Wyden (D-OR)

6 democrats voted no here. Baucus, Feingold, Landrieu, Zell Miller, Ben Nelson, and Harry Reid. Johnson also missed the vote again. Lincoln and Pryor did not represent Arkansas' views here. Dorgan and Conrad aren't our friends. Byrd again goes bad. As for the GOP jokers listed here - good riddance to a lot of them - Chafee, DeWine, Fitzgerakd. And what's with Snowe, Collins, and especially Gregg? Maine's liberal, but not really on guns. New Hampshire isn't anti.

Only Zell, Baucus (and he choked back in 93), and Ben Nelson have been consistant - and Zell's gone. I have yet to see what the new crowd will do, but based on the last 14 years since Bill Clinton took office, I don't expect much except a lot of talking pro and voting anti.

That's not to say the Republicans are perfect. We're far from it and have a lot of work to do. A McCain presidency would be a disaster for us. That said, there certainly is a party line on these votes, especially on the federal level. States are a little different, but even in my state with a lot of pro-gun democrats on local levels, about only 30% of them supported CCW, compared to about 20% anti on the GOP level.

We must always stay vigilante no matter who is in office, but now more than ever - heads up.

[SoCalShooter]

This I did not know. Thank you. Quite concering.

[GoRon]

I was just reading the thread on Wikipedia.

In it I ran across a quote by one of the moderators that in my point of view sums up many of the gun owners I see on here THR.
As gunnies, most of our failures, IMO, are the direct result of vacating the field to our enemies.

We allowed ourselves to be so upset at the Republicans that we allowed the enemy of gun owners to get in control.

http://feinstein.senate.gov/Photos_page/images/040302-awb-schumer-df-kerry-kennedy.jpg

[Dan from MI]

I think much of that has to do with expectations. We have (deservingly) high expectations of Republicans. I agree with that as well - but we need the same pressure, and same expectations, and the same heat on the dems as we do for people like Mr. McCain.

Easy for me to say. I'm stuck with "Stabmenow" Stabenow and "Lenin" Levin

[hillbilly]

But wait..........hang on......

You're about to hear from a bunch of THR posters who will argue and argue and argue that NOT ALL Dems are Anti Gunnies!!!

Yep, there are a bunch of Dem-voting THR posters who are about to come to your thread and argue that NOT ALL Dems are anti-gun bigots.

And they are right on, of course.

It's not all, it's more like only about 87% of Congressional Dems are anti-gun bigots.....:neener:

hillbilly

[GoRon]

It's not all, it's more like only about 87% of Congressional Dems are anti-gun bigots.....


While I don't hold out much hope, I sure hope the 13% have enough influence on the leadership to get them to ignore the gun issue.

[EttenBoom]

We allowed ourselves to be so upset at the Republicans that we allowed the enemy of gun owners to get in control.

I think it's more fair to say the Republicans did such a poor job, that they became so drunk with power that they let the enemy of gun owners get in control.

Don't blame me, I didn't vote Democrat.

[gengarnett]

the democrats are certainly not the lesser of two evils. they are smiling like the cheshire cat that so many so called Repubs were so disenchanted they "sat this out". reminds me of when the Mensheviks (who were the majority" walked out of the vote in Russia and let the Bolsheviks win in a land slide. now harm there right? Just 70 years of the Soviet Union.

[Lone_Gunman]

We allowed ourselves to be so upset at the Republicans that we allowed the enemy of gun owners to get in control.


How can you allow yourself to be a one-issue voter? The Constitution is more than just the second amendment.

The idea that "we" caused the Republicans to lose really is getting old. "We" didn't cause it; the Republicans did. They controlled the Presidency, House, Senate, and Supreme Court, and yet managed to screw things up so badly that they had to be fired.

The Republican Party broke from its tradition of standing for small, limited non-intrusive government that was strong on defense. They became a party weak on all those things.

Here is a partial list of grievances I could come up with off the top of my head I have against the neo-conservatives that have hi-jacked the Republican party:

Campaign Finance Reform
Medicare Reform
No Child Left Behind
Patriot Act
Military Commissions Act
No plan, at all, in Iraq, except "stay the course"
A never-ending War on Terror
Largest increase in social welfare since LBJ
Largest increase in size of government bureaucracy since LBJ.
Unprotected southern border
Amnesty for Illegals
Harriet Miers fiasco

And all I got in return for this crap is no new gun regulations?

[woerm]

+1

reptiles had 12 years to ditch any gun regs

we got zilch.

on top of that they stuck in the 'energy bill' a deal for mercinaries to buy new production machine guns while still banning us (US citizens) from buying new machine guns

whom to blame

I am back in fire them all, all of them mode.

if the judges can't read keep as meaning own,

bear as meaning carry they need to be impeached for treason.:fire:

legiscritters that keep sending $ to gestapo fools at ftroop need to sent home.:cuss:

r

[Zundfolge]

reptiles had 12 years to ditch any gun regs

we got zilch.

Zilch? You think if Dems were in charge the AWB would have sunset? You think the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act would have made it through this new congress we're about to get?

In addition we got no new gun control laws.


That all ends January '07 when the Dems are back in power ... you WILL see new gun control laws and you will NOT see anything turned back ... get prepared for REAL "zilch" (or is that filch?)

legiscritters that keep sending $ to gestapo fools at ftroop need to sent home.
You have two choices, Republicans or Democrats ... getting rid of Republicans and replacing them with Democrats doesn't make you safer from the abuses of F-Troop. No, Republicans aren't a guarantee, but they are better at protecting our gun rights than Democrats.

Unfortunately we can't just close them down, board up the capital building and send them all home. We have to be realistic here.

[Stiletto Null]

Voting in the mid-terms was bizarre.

Almost all of the local Dem candidates (city council, state senate, etc.) had A ratings from the NRA, and one C (someone running for city council, who I voted for because his Rep opponent was just repugnant).

At Congress level, Fs across the board. It was really weird.

[Zundfolge]

Stiletto Null, its pretty clear to me that the national Democrat party is WAY out of touch with its grass roots.

[Stevie-Ray]

We must always stay vigilante no matter who is in office, but now more than ever - heads up.Was that a freudian slip?:D

[gengarnett]

Zilch? You think if Dems were in charge the AWB would have sunset? You think the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act would have made it through this new congress we're about to get?


stop making sense, you might hurt some heads. No child left behind? Harriet Miers? lol, you have got to be freaking kidding! You now have a Democrat Congress, no more Sam Alitos or John Roberts's will be made justices, you have pulled that off sir.

[Vic]

The Dems blew the 90's with there anti-gun agenda and paid the price for over a decade. If they have learned ANYTHING at all, if they want to win elections they better leave the gun issue alone. Pure stupidity if they try what they did in the 90's again and I think they know this. Maybe the REPUBLICANS have hosed things up a bit but I think I've been more secure in my gun rights since they've been in there (I feel better than when Kommie Klinton was in). Bush knew if the AWB was re-instated, he wouldn't have stood a chance for re-election and so directed the issue NOT to come to his desk for signature. The dems have been served the warning and they better HEED that warning. It's a shame that a party that is supposed to represent the blue collar working man only represents communism, GAY people, black people, and women. MANY who were Democrats in the 50's and 60's NOW vote republican because the dems no longer represent them. Let's see...Ronald Regan was one. I don't agree with all that he did, but he was an avid gun owner and the NRA loved him. The anti's even went as far as to say that Ronald Regan supported the California AWB. The man OWNED several collectable COLT AR15's I have been told. Why would he support a measure that made his collection illegal?:banghead:

[Gray Peterson]

GAY people, black people, and women

Yes, because representing more than 50 percent of the population is a bad thing, right?

Bigotry like this is why we'll never make a huge amount of headway on the gun issue with a lot of liberals.

[RealGun]

I noticed the "Good Southern Democrat" Hollings vote for this trash. - Dan from MI

Good analysis. Just for the record, Hollings is long gone (retired 2004), replaced by DeMint, an A rated Republican from the House and charter member of the House 2nd Amendment Caucus.

Like other States, South Carolina has political disparity between coastal cities and the rest of the State. If we could shed Spratt and Pryor, I would feel like there was some unity in what SC represents. "Guns, God, and Gays" is fair though. We just passed a marriage amendment.

[Autolycus]

Orgininally posted by Lone_Gunman:

How can you allow yourself to be a one-issue voter? The Constitution is more than just the second amendment.

The idea that "we" caused the Republicans to lose really is getting old. "We" didn't cause it; the Republicans did. They controlled the Presidency, House, Senate, and Supreme Court, and yet managed to screw things up so badly that they had to be fired.

The Republican Party broke from its tradition of standing for small, limited non-intrusive government that was strong on defense. They became a party weak on all those things.

Here is a partial list of grievances I could come up with off the top of my head I have against the neo-conservatives that have hi-jacked the Republican party:

Campaign Finance Reform
Medicare Reform
No Child Left Behind
Patriot Act
Military Commissions Act
No plan, at all, in Iraq, except "stay the course"
A never-ending War on Terror
Largest increase in social welfare since LBJ
Largest increase in size of government bureaucracy since LBJ.
Unprotected southern border
Amnesty for Illegals
Harriet Miers fiasco

And all I got in return for this crap is no new gun regulations?

This is pretty much how I feel. I am not as concerned with the borders and the illegals but that is another matter. As it stands the Republicans gave us the protection for gun makers law. Great.

However they kind of tore up the rest of the Bill of Rights with some of these things. We need to take the entire BOR rights or none at all.

Vic: You make it sound like representing blacks, women, and gays is a bad thing. As others have stated they are also a part of this country and work just as hard as you or I. And don't kid yourself about the Democrats blowing the 90s with their antigun agenda. Reagan signed some anti gun things and he didnt blow the 80s.

The truth is that we as gunowners would like to think we matter more than we do. If guns were that big of a deal why did the 94 ban pass? Why did Clinton get re-elected? Simple... because the majority of Americans dont care to much about guns. We are not as strong as we like to think we are.

The issues that are on American minds right now are: IRAQ, gay rights, and abortion rights. Abortion rights was not so much an issue as it was during the whole supreme court justice fiascp. But gay rights comes up now and again when it is convenient for both the democrats to give support to and for republicans to inspire fear into conservatives everywhere.

What really is on the minds and why we lost the house is Iraq. People are wondering what has been done? I am sure a lot of progress has been made but noone here really knows about it. We always hear returning soldiers tell us how much has been done but they dont reach the majority. Iraq is what cost the Republicans the house and senate. People want results and they want to know what is going on. The Republicans kept saying trust us, things are getting done. Thats all they would say. Then the news reports that X number of soldiers died today and nobody trusts the republicans anymore.

Basically we as gunowners dont really matter. However there was an article in USA today saying that the big 3 things democrats are going to try and work on were (this was not including Iraq whcih the article stated was a given): Gay Rights, Abortion Rights, and GUN CONTROL. So we must be weary.

If AWB 2 gets passed lets see if Bush will sign it. I believe he will. He said he would have renewed the first one so another one wont bethat big of a deal. I am sure this one will be much worse.

Well I am off to bed.

Cheers.

[the pistolero]

The issues that are on American minds right now are: IRAQ, gay rights, and abortion rights. Abortion rights was not so much an issue as it was during the whole supreme court justice fiascp. But gay rights comes up now and again when it is convenient for both the democrats to give support to and for republicans to inspire fear into conservatives everywhere.

I agree on Iraq, but as for gay & abortion rights, I think those are issues more important to the authoritarian conservatives the GOP has been courting in recent years, aka the social conservatives. I'm against abortion personally, but I'd love to tell a good chunk of those social-cons to take a flying leap off a cliff with wings weighted with lead.

[Autolycus]

I concur The Pistolero. But those issues I seem to remember a lot more in recent times. The gay rights issue during the election time. Abortion rights during the selection process of a new supreme court justice. Either way I am tired of the social conservatives and their views myself.

[RealGun]

People want results and they want to know what is going on.

Aw phooey! The majority seem to want to be either entertained, paid, or not taxed. Furthermore, they would prefer to force others to live the way they do.

[strambo]

A never-ending War on Terror

Um, the Republicans didn't start this...the terrorists did...in the 70's. The Republicans just decided to fight back, how horrid.:rolleyes:

[FLCLIFF]

I read the other day that the Democrat's game plan is to attack gun ownership on the state level. The Democrats apparently have a list of 100 priorities and gun control on the federal level is in the 90s. I do not think we should ever let down our guard but we would be wise to keep an eye on the states that now have Democrat Governors.

[GoRon]

Did you see the picture I posted earlier?

That is who is going to have to sign off on judicial nominees now.

If a Supreme Court Justice retires they will be replaced with a leftist now, the left is calling the shots.

We had a chance to get the court pointed in an originalist direction and blew it.

By putting the Dems in power we have given President Bush cover to nominate a consensus nominee,ie. someone the Democrats had a hand in picking.

We will see, hope I am wrong.

[The_Shootist]

I don't personally care about what the Republicans did wrong (and in an economy with lower taxes, a 12000+ Dow Index and an unemployment rate below 5% - not much).

The Iraq war...umm....I seem to recall we kill 2800 on the highways every 3 weeks. Guess we should cut and run from the nations Interstates. Frankly I'm quite tired of the bitching of the progress on the Iraq war. Wars mean fighting fighting means killing. If we had the same media / same left wing scum for Democrats 60 years ago, half the world would be speaking German (or Jap...or Russian possibly).

Given the above, yeah I'm a one issue voter with respect to the 2nd Amendment. Yeah, after Katrina I figure I DO need an assault weapon. Its about my safety, my ability to concealed carry and to purchase firearms at MY discretion.

The Democrats in congress in no way strengthen these needs or benefit me as a citizen.

[Lone_Gunman]

You now have a Democrat Congress, no more Sam Alitos or John Roberts's will be made justices, you have pulled that off sir.

<Insult removed by Art>

First I would point out that the Supreme Court is already a fairly liberal court, despite the fact that 7 out of 9 Justices are REPUBLICAN appointees.

Second, I would point out that Clarence Thomas, the most conservative member of the Supreme Court, and the most ardent supporter of the 2nd Amendment as an individual right, was confirmed by a DEMOCRAT controlled Senate.

The point at which I quit caring about having Republicans pick the SC justices was when Bush nominated Harriet Miers. The fact that he would pick his personal lawyer, and a legal unknown, for one of the most powerful jobs in government either shows a lack of understanding of the importance of the role, or contempt for the Supreme Court. One of the Roman Emperors nominated his horse to the Roman Senate, and Bush's nomination of Miers was little different.

[GoRon]

The point at which I quit caring about having Republicans pick the SC justices was when Bush nominated Harriet Miers.

I would take her over any pick the Democrats would send up.

One area this President hasn't compromised us is in his judicial appointments (H Miers notwithstanding).

He has renominated a bunch just recently that were rejected due to the Dems earlier. So he may "stay the course" with judicial nominees.

This is the arena where the real battles are being fought for the soul of the country.

Libertarian and populist rhetoric aside, putting the Democrats in positions of power is a major step backward for ALL our freedoms.

The Democrats have a very progressive view of the constitution and judiciary. They believe the constitution can be interpreted to mean anything and that the courts should be used to impose social justice.

[Lone_Gunman]

I would take her over any pick the Democrats would send up.

Really. See, I would rather have another Clarence Thomas (did I mention he was confirmed by Democrats?), over an unknown like Harriet Miers.

[GoRon]

Really. See, I would rather have another Clarence Thomas (did I mention he was confirmed by Democrats?), over an unknown like Harriet Miers

That goes without saying, so would I.

I was speaking of a H Clinton or J Kerry appointment.

[Dan from MI]

Really. See, I would rather have another Clarence Thomas (did I mention he was confirmed by Democrats?), over an unknown like Harriet Miers.

We're now more likely to get Stephen Reinhardt now.

[geronimotwo]

if i were a republican political strategist, this democratic coup would be exactly what i would want for 2008. the power to veto is still in the white house, and they will point out all the shortcomings of the democratic leaders for the next two years. i'm sure that the major rallying cry will be taxes, as someone has to cover the expenditures of the current administration. how can we go from the greatest surpluss to the worst debt in 6 years? (did someone just whisper halliburton?) any responsible politician will need to address this. the republicans knew if they taxed us for the war, we would have been found lacking in "moral justification" to go forward. so, heads up for the republican "revolution" of 2008.

[glennv]

Look at where the Dems gained seats. Indiana, Virginia, Montana! One mention of gun control and they loses these seats next election. Let's hope they raise the issue this term so we can be done with them.

[Lone_Gunman]

I was speaking of a H Clinton or J Kerry appointment.


The Senate only confirms appointees. They don't get to pick. So, I would ask, why do you think Bush would appoint Hillary or Kerry?

Do you have that little faith in our Republican president?

[GoRon]

The Senate only confirms appointees. They don't get to pick. So, I would ask, why do you think Bush would appoint Hillary or Kerry?

Do you have that little faith in our Republican president?
I was pointing out the past and probable future Democrat Presidential nominees. If the trend of kicking out republicans continues you will see how bad SC nominees can be and we will be wishing for someone like a H Miers.

[Lone_Gunman]

I was pointing out the past and probable future Democrat Presidential nominees.

Oh, Ok. The rest of the thread is about Democrats in Congress... like the title mentions.

[Phetro]

Quote:
A never-ending War on Terror

Um, the Republicans didn't start this...the terrorists did...in the 70's. The Republicans just decided to fight back, how horrid.

That's right--and the war won't be over until the very last of our liberties falls.

Someone above said something like "is it wrong to serve the majority of the people?" or some such nonsense. The answer is yes. This is why democracy is a failed system. It is why America was supposed to be a Constitutional Republic. Most people are weak-minded, and will be led like sheep to make weak decisions, as well as elect "leaders" who will drive the country ever leftward. Democracy is the problem, not the solution.

[woerm]

Well in reply to:
Zilch? You think if Dems were in charge the AWB would have sunset? You think the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act would have made it through this new congress we're about to get?

In addition we got no new gun control laws.

even the dimwits can see that voting for an AWB would get them unemployed,

the reptiles Renewed with a voice vote the George the Duce's sig the BAN on even researching polymer weapons(plastic guns) despite a 40 yr old DOD RFQ for reliable corrosion resistant polymer weapons.

and the trigger lock bs in the 'lawful commerece' bill,

so yes the reptiles failed us in
a not getting rid of regulations,
b passing more dimwit restictions.

grr
:cuss:

[Art Eatman]

Pro-gun: Cong. Dingell, D-Michigan.

[Zundfolge]

even the dimwits can see that voting for an AWB would get them unemployed,
If you honestly believe that a Democrat controlled house and senate would NOT have voted to renew the AWB than there's really not much point in discussing this with you further.

The vast majority of Democrats voted FOR renewal.

[woerm]

Uh,

even slick willie aka bj kintoon :barf: said the awb cost the dhimnwits the house in 94.:D

why do you think the dhimnwits did not play any evil guns routines this trip:scrutiny:

I do fully expect an awb 2 out of a hiildabeast or schumer admin w/ a dhimnwit controlled congress, though.:cuss: :cuss: :scrutiny:

r

[RealGun]

Dingell (D-MI)

NRA-PVF A+

GOA C-

There are a number of these A vs. C disparities. I believe part of the difference is a GOA penalty for voting to waive the rule and allow gun restrictions to be included in omnibus spending bills, which normally do not allow legislation to be included. This is the kind of stuff that passes under the radar, pork the most infamous among them.

Another one is allowing important amendments to be stricken in conference.

Lastly, NRA backs measures that GOA does not, for example trigger locks.