1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

S.649 Live Debate Thread - CSPAN2

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Bartholomew Roberts, Apr 11, 2013.

  1. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Reid pushing to take up debate immediately after lunch rather than wait the usual 30 hours.

    Amendment schedule:

    Magazine ban

    After this they will allow the Republicans to catch up and the alternate D/R amendments.

    Recess until 2:30 eastern
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  2. Doc7

    Doc7 Well-Known Member

    After these votes, what other procedures, debates, votes are required for this to become active law?
  3. Bubbles

    Bubbles Well-Known Member

    Whatever the Senate finally passes has to go to the House to be voted on, amended, etc. Then it goes to reconciliation if different bills passed the House and Senate, then both houses vote again on the final bill (no amendments permitted at this point), and the President signs the bill into law.
  4. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    This was just a vote on whether or not to begin discussing gun control legislation. Now that it was a "Yes" vote, they will recess until 2:30pm eastern. When they return, they will take up the Toomey-Manchin Amendment first (even though nobody has seen the text yet :confused:), then the AWB, then magazine bans. After that, they will allow the Republicans to offer amendments until they "catch up" and then they will alternate D/R amendments.

    Open amendment process. Senators will vote on each amendment. If it gets 51 votes, it becomes part of S.649. If it doesn't, it dies for now. Senators Reid and Lee both said this could take weeks to get to a final vote. Right before the final vote, we will have another chance to filibuster. If it passes the Senate, then it goes to the House and everything starts again there (except no filibuster in the House).
  5. salvador31c

    salvador31c Well-Known Member

    Excuse my ignorance but how & why was it decided that there would not be a 30 hour wait to give the senators a chance to view the text of the Toomey-Manchin Amendment?
  6. Ohio Gun Guy

    Ohio Gun Guy Well-Known Member

    Text of the Bill, under Transfer

    `(t)(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee shall comply with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the licensee's inventory to the unlicensed transferee.
    `(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
    `(A) bona fide gifts between spouses, between parents and their children, between siblings, or between grandparents and their grandchildren;
    `(B) a transfer made from a decedent's estate, pursuant to a legal will or the operation of law;
    `(C) a temporary transfer of possession that occurs between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee, if--
    `(i) the temporary transfer of possession occurs in the home or curtilage of the unlicensed transferor;
    `(ii) the firearm is not removed from that home or curtilage during the temporary transfer; and
    `(iii) the transfer has a duration of less than 7 days; and
    `(D) a temporary transfer of possession without transfer of title made in connection with lawful hunting or sporting purposes if the transfer occurs--
    `(i) at a shooting range located in or on premises owned or occupied by a duly incorporated organization organized for conservation purposes or to foster proficiency in firearms and the firearm is, at all times, kept within the premises of the shooting range;
    `(ii) at a target firearm shooting competition under the auspices of or approved by a State agency or nonprofit organization and the firearm is, at all times, kept within the premises of the shooting competition; or
    `(iii) while hunting or trapping, if--
    `(I) the activity is legal in all places where the unlicensed transferee possesses the firearm;
    `(II) the temporary transfer of possession occurs during the designated hunting season; and
    `(III) the unlicensed transferee holds any required license or permit.
    `(3) For purposes of this subsection, the term `transfer'--
    `(A) shall include a sale, gift, loan, return from pawn or consignment, or other disposition; and
    `(B) shall not include temporary possession of the firearm for purposes of examination or evaluation by a prospective transferee while in the presence of the prospective transferee.
    `(4)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this subsection with regulations.
    `(B) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph--
    `(i) shall include a provision setting a maximum fee that may be charged by licensees for services provided in accordance with paragraph (1); and
    `(ii) shall include a provision requiring a record of transaction of any transfer that occurred between an unlicensed transferor and unlicensed transferee accordance with paragraph (1).'.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments-
    (1) SECTION 922- Section 922(y)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking `, (g)(5)(B), and (s)(3)(B)(v)(II)' and inserting `and (g)(5)(B)'.
    (2) SECTION 925A- Section 925A of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking `subsection (s) or (t) of section 922' and inserting `section 922(s)'.
    (3) NICS IMPROVEMENT AMENDMENTS ACT- Section 103(f) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 is amended by striking `section 922(t)' and inserting `section 922(s)'.
    (4) CONSOLIDATED AND FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012- Section 511 of title V of division B of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended by striking `subsection 922(t)' and inserting `section 922(s)' each place it appears.


    (a) In General- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end--
    `(aa) It shall be unlawful for any person who lawfully possesses or owns a firearm that has been shipped or transported in, or has been possessed in or affecting, interstate or foreign commerce, to fail to report the theft or loss of the firearm, within 24 hours after the person discovers the theft or loss, to the Attorney General and to the appropriate local authorities.'.
    (b) Penalty- Section 924(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:
    `(B) knowingly violates subsection (a)(4), (f), (k), (q), or (aa) of section 922;'.


    The amendments made by this title shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
  7. gc70

    gc70 Well-Known Member

    After the vote to proceed, Reid discussed the open amendments process and other procedural details. I was not listening as closely as I should have been, but I thought he said something about moving forward today so Manchin and Toomey would be able to prepare to discuss their amendment on Tuesday morning.
  8. akv3g4n

    akv3g4n Well-Known Member

    Anyone have a link to find how your Senator voted?
  9. gc70

    gc70 Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  10. salvador31c

    salvador31c Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  11. Ohio Gun Guy

    Ohio Gun Guy Well-Known Member

    We need lots of folks to hit that site, and make sure their senators know we are looking. Immagine if the traffic crashed the site or hit record numbers....

    Lots of uncomfortable Senators!
  12. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Well-Known Member

    At this point in time they're is no reason to rush to judgment, and some good reasons not to.

    We should not forget that both the president and NRA are in complete agreement on one point: They both want these bills to go forward far enough to be voted on.


    Because then both sides will know who is on what side. When it comes to legislators what they say is meaningless. How they vote is what matters. If supposed friends turn on us now we will deal with them latter in the mid-term 2014 election or later, and fortunately we have time to get ready and hopefully financially support those that really stand fast with us with donations to their campaign funds. Those that turn out to be pretended supporters of the 2nd Amendment will discover they kicked a hornet's nest.

    Even if these bills survive and pass through the Democrat-dominated Senate in they're present form (which is far from a sure thing), they must still be passed in the House of Representatives, that at the present time seems doubtful. Since all of the House members will be up for election in 2014, our communications and e-mails - especially if they continue- will carry additional weight.

    As time passes we will both lose and win some battles, but the war is far from over.
  13. Bubbles

    Bubbles Well-Known Member

    ETA: Ohio Gun Guy posted the text of the bill while I was posting this. I don't see anything in the bill that would permit transfers between "neighbors".

    Supposedly this is a synopsis of the bill (firearm-related stuff only), my comments are in red:

    Summary of Title I: This section improves background checks for firearms by strengthening the instant check system.

    • Encourage states to provide all their available records to NICS by restricting federal funds to states who do not comply. - All funds? Some funds?

    • Allow dealers to voluntarily use the NICS database to run background checks on their prospective employees. - While nice, it wouldn't necessarily pick up everything I as a store owner need to know before trusting someone to handle money.

    • Clarifies that submissions of mental health records into the NICS system are not prohibited by federal privacy laws (HIPAA) - This is a MAJOR problem IMO.

    • Provides a legal process for a veteran to contest his/her placement in NICS when there is no basis for barring the right to own a firearm. - I thought one already exists.


    Summary of Title II: This section of the bill requires background checks for sales at gun shows and online while securing certain aspects of 2nd Amendment rights for law abiding citizens.

    • Closes the gun show and other loopholes while exempting temporary transfers and transfers between family members. - 1) There is no "gun show loophole", and 2) what "other loopholes"?

    • Fixes interstate travel laws for sportsmen who transport their firearms across state lines in a responsible manner. The term "transport" includes staying in temporary lodging overnight, stopping for food, buying fuel, vehicle maintenance, and medical treatment. - OK this is good and hopefully will stop places like NYC and Port of NJ from infringing on the rights of air travelers, but I won't hold my breath unless it also includes some sort of punishment for the state or locality.

    • Protects sellers from lawsuits if the weapon cleared through the expanded background checks and is subsequently used in a crime. This is the same treatment gun dealers receive now. - How many private sellers have ever been sued for this?

    • Allows dealers to complete transactions at gun shows that take place in a state for which they are not a resident. - About time.

    • Ensures that sales at gun shows are not prevented by delayed approvals from NICS. - So what if I call NICS at 4:55 pm on Sunday afternoon from a gun show, and I get a delayed response?

    • Requires the FBI to give priority to finalizing background checks at gun shows over checks at store front dealerships. - So now we have to tell NICS if we're calling from a gun show or from the premises? Yeah, figure every weekend every FFL will be calling in from a gun show no matter what.

    • Authorizes use of a state concealed carry permit instead of a background check when purchasing a firearm from a dealer. - Across the board in all states, no matter what standard the state uses to issue permits?

    • Permits interstate handgun sales from dealers. - This is long overdue.

    • Allows active military to buy firearms in their home states. - They can already with appropriate ID.

    • Family transfers and some private sales (friends, neighbors, other individuals) are exempt from background checks. - But what if you see your neighbor at a gun show? How is "neighbor" defined?

    • Adds a 15 year penalty for improper use or storage of records.
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  14. alsaqr

    alsaqr Well-Known Member

    There is one big sticking point. The VA and other federal agencies do not use an adjudification process.
  15. tarosean

    tarosean Well-Known Member

    Or friend for that matter???
  16. tarosean

    tarosean Well-Known Member

    Ohhhhh.. I would have never guessed that with the constant pictures of the slain children. :fire:
  17. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    I would love to explain but I am ignorant to the how & why myself. Reid expressed his wish that it go down that way. I don't know if he has the power to do that as Senate Majority Leader or if they are working that out in caucus now during a recess and he was just expressing what he would like.
  18. baz

    baz Well-Known Member

    The vote is up. Check this list and see if your Senator is on it:

    Alexander (R-TN), Yea
    Ayotte (R-NH), Yea
    Burr (R-NC), Yea
    Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
    Coburn (R-OK), Yea
    Collins (R-ME), Yea
    Corker (R-TN), Yea
    Flake (R-AZ), Yea
    Graham (R-SC), Yea
    Heller (R-NV), Yea
    Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
    Isakson (R-GA), Yea
    Kirk (R-IL), Yea
    McCain (R-AZ), Yea
    Toomey (R-PA), Yea
    Wicker (R-MS), Yea

    Begich (D-AK), Nay
    Pryor (D-AR), Nay

    Why isn't the NRA "scoring" this vote?
  19. Fryerpower

    Fryerpower Well-Known Member

    Grouped By Vote Position

    YEAs ---68
    Alexander (R-TN)
    Ayotte (R-NH)
    Baldwin (D-WI)
    Baucus (D-MT)
    Bennet (D-CO)
    Blumenthal (D-CT)
    Boxer (D-CA)
    Brown (D-OH)
    Burr (R-NC)
    Cantwell (D-WA)
    Cardin (D-MD)
    Carper (D-DE)
    Casey (D-PA)
    Chambliss (R-GA)
    Coburn (R-OK)
    Collins (R-ME)
    Coons (D-DE)
    Corker (R-TN)
    Cowan (D-MA)
    Donnelly (D-IN)
    Durbin (D-IL)
    Feinstein (D-CA)
    Flake (R-AZ)
    Franken (D-MN)
    Gillibrand (D-NY)
    Graham (R-SC)
    Hagan (D-NC)
    Harkin (D-IA)
    Heinrich (D-NM)
    Heitkamp (D-ND)
    Heller (R-NV)
    Hirono (D-HI)
    Hoeven (R-ND)
    Isakson (R-GA)
    Johnson (D-SD)
    Kaine (D-VA)
    King (I-ME)
    Kirk (R-IL)
    Klobuchar (D-MN)
    Landrieu (D-LA)
    Leahy (D-VT)
    Levin (D-MI)
    Manchin (D-WV)
    McCain (R-AZ)
    McCaskill (D-MO)
    Menendez (D-NJ)
    Merkley (D-OR)
    Mikulski (D-MD)
    Murphy (D-CT)
    Murray (D-WA)
    Nelson (D-FL)
    Reed (D-RI)
    Reid (D-NV)
    Rockefeller (D-WV)
    Sanders (I-VT)
    Schatz (D-HI)
    Schumer (D-NY)
    Shaheen (D-NH)
    Stabenow (D-MI)
    Tester (D-MT)
    Toomey (R-PA)
    Udall (D-CO)
    Udall (D-NM)
    Warner (D-VA)
    Warren (D-MA)
    Whitehouse (D-RI)
    Wicker (R-MS)
    Wyden (D-OR)

    NAYs ---31
    Barrasso (R-WY)
    Begich (D-AK)
    Blunt (R-MO)
    Boozman (R-AR)
    Coats (R-IN)
    Cochran (R-MS)
    Cornyn (R-TX)
    Crapo (R-ID)
    Cruz (R-TX)
    Enzi (R-WY)
    Fischer (R-NE)
    Grassley (R-IA)
    Hatch (R-UT)
    Inhofe (R-OK)
    Johanns (R-NE)
    Johnson (R-WI)
    Lee (R-UT)
    McConnell (R-KY)
    Moran (R-KS)
    Murkowski (R-AK)
    Paul (R-KY)
    Portman (R-OH)
    Pryor (D-AR)
    Risch (R-ID)
    Roberts (R-KS)
    Rubio (R-FL)
    Scott (R-SC)
    Sessions (R-AL)
    Shelby (R-AL)
    Thune (R-SD)
    Vitter (R-LA)

    Not Voting - 1
    Lautenberg (D-NJ)
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  20. mdauben

    mdauben Well-Known Member

    I really have to question this line of thinking. If there is any chance at all of a bill like this passing (and while it may be unlikely, anyone who thinks its impossible is living in a fools paradice) I feel we should take every opportunity that presents itself to stop this bill. :mad:

    Its up now, and there are a lot of suprising (to me at least) votes. I see AZ, GA, and TN, all solidly Republican states, voted for "cloture" (whatever the heck that means). Many other states split their votes, with yet more Republicans voting for "cloture". If they needed 60 votes to pass the motion, it was Republicans who give them the push over the top they needed. :fire:

    At least I have the comfort that both of my Senators voted against the motion.

Share This Page