Can an AWB pass the US Senate

I can't see Democrats wanting to take the gun control plunge right now because the country seems volatile right now. With people grumbling for secession just because of Obama's reelection, imagine whatever fallout from the fiscal cliff issue will cause. If they decided to take a shot at the 2nd amendment, that might be the straw that breaks the camels back in a short amount of time. I think the gun control right now is posturing, but that is by no means a reason to kick back the recliner. Irregardless of the gun climate, letters should be sent to elected officials, praising them for their good work, or laying out their shortcomings. I am not happy with a bare majority in the house being our only firmament. Let's take back the senate.

Oh the Dem's will try it. I have no doubt.

I just receieved word back from Senator Harkin (IA) on Friday(I should note this is the first time EVER he's replied to me). He's in for the AWB. I don't have a copy of the message I sent him via his website, but I'm pretty sure I mentioned the 2A being nesissary against tyranny as one of it's purposes.

He rattled on about how he's a hunter and agrees with defending one's self , but said that we don't need "high capacity" clips and "military style" guns to do those things, blah blah blah.

It's the omission of the tyranny concept by legislators that worries me. Whether or not they believe that was the intent or not for the 2nd Amendment, or whether they choose not to think about it, is quite concerning. They're either asleep at the wheel or intentionally steering "forward" and "progressively" toward becoming tyrants.

We have long memories. When is he up for re-election?

Harkin is up in 2014.

I read somewhere (can't remember which thread) that Grassley (IA) made comments about it being time for possible gun control. He's usually been very pro-gun, or at the very least not anti-gun. I was very disapointed having read that he'd be in support of more controls.

The bad thing is that both senators are very involved in many aspects of the senate, especially in agriculture, so sending them packing will be very difficult.

Here's the thing to remember as well. I pay a lot more attention to their actions than their words. I will penalize them more for their votes than their words.

I don't know about an AWB, I suspect one will pass, and in a more rigorous form than the sham from last time.

But I'll give good odds that U.S. milsurp brass, bullets, powder, and anything else vaguely gun related is soon to be gone forever. Politically impossible to continue.

MachIVshooter said:

This kind of talk is encouraging.

I don't have as much confidence in my state's senators. Bennett will probably go for it if it's not over the top, but he may be feeling the pressure from a recently (barely) blue state that still values personal freedom very highly. There are a lot of pro-gun Democrats and independents here that put him in office, and may not do it again if they feel he has infringed their right.

Udall is an overconfident zealot who moved into the senate from a very liberal house district (Boulder area). I can all but guarantee he'll vote for any form of anti-gun legislation. It may cost him his seat, but I don't think he believes it can happen. He is still acting as though he was elected in his safe zone.

I have written both of them, as well as our governor. I'll send my house representative a quick note, too, but I'm not worried about Mike. He is representing a very conservative and extremely pro gun district. Any support for gun control will absolutely cost him his seat, and he's well aware of that.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Our state has gone from red to blue, and our senators will almost surely vote to support any AWB bill. We may prevent a national ban only on the basis of the fact that conservatives still hold the house.

But, for you and I, I expect we're going to see a ban here in our home state. Governor Hickenlooper is no friends to gun owners, and our state house/senate are each about 60% Democrat at this point. Bad news for us!

How do you think it can pass the house?

(I'm getting tired of repeating this.) The last AWB passed by one vote, with sneaky tactics, with an expiration date built in. It STILL cost the dems both houses in the '94 mid-term elections. When Obama took office in 2009, 60 some-odd Democrat congressmen sent a letter to the Attorney General and the White House stating that they will not support or vote for any new gun legislation. Meaning; "Don't even try it, you don't have the votes." Obama has wanted a new ban all along. The reason he hasn't done anything about it is that he knows he doesn't have the votes. THIS HASN'T CHANGED. The same congresspersons who always harumph about this are doing it. (Feinstein, McCarthy, Lautenberg, et al.) They have introduced this bill probably more than twenty times. They have a FEW more people agreeing with them, and a few new senators. There are many more who will SAY something vague or favorable right now. They might even take it down to the wire, and horse-trade some votes in the process, voting for it knowing it doesn't have the votes to pass, to try to tell one concerned party that they were in favor of it when they actually knew it would lose, therefore costing them nothing. MANY will wait until the feel which way the wind is blowing, then decide they will vote in favor knowing it won't pass.

This is far from being a done deal. The thing we SHOULDN'T do right now is act like we are already defeated and that we have no control over it. In 1994, most of us didn't know how to use the internet AT ALL. Now we are organized and aware. We are not the underdogs here. We do not have to accept that ANYTHING is about to happen to us. We are able to PERSONALLY breathe down the necks of our reps. We are able to immediately respond to bad reporting and editorials. We need to do so. This is real. This is work. This will be hard. But we are NOT close to defeat. We have had nothing but positive momentum since 2004. We have proven the antis wrong over and over again. We have forced them to change their tactics and rhetoric. OUR facts have been proven to be correct. Just because the opposition has seized on one bad event in a lame-duck timeframe does not change that.

Huh? Maybe not clear. I don't mean confiscation of the stuff that's out there. They will quit allowing those U.S. surplus items to be sold to the public. You really think that will continue? Headline: "U.S. Govt selling assault weapon ammo to highest bidders!" Not true, but that's how they'll spin it. No way they'll keep selling it.

But, for you and I, I expect we're going to see a ban here in our home state. Governor Hickenlooper is no friends to gun owners, and our state house/senate are each about 60% Democrat at this point. Bad news for us!

Click to expand...

Let me ask a rhetorical question. What if they pass a law prohibiting women from voting? (Oh I know, but this is a “what if”.)

Women’s right to vote is protected by the U.S. Constitution, and federal courts would quickly knock it down.

Today the right of individuals to possess firearms is equally protected by the 2nd Amendment, and the McDonald decision made by the Supreme Court, which later was made binding on the states. The assault rifle ban in California is working its way through the courts now, and its future does not look bright. Reasonable regulation (?) might pass muster, but a total ban wouldn’t likely make it. Keep in mind that tactical firearms are widely owned by people in the United States, that in recent years they’re sales have surpassed those of any other style of rifle, and in an overall view they are seldom used in crimes, (something like 6 or 7 percent, and that’s including ALL rifles.

The facts definitely make sense and are on our side, but right now, we are dealing with emotions, and they are trying to capitalize on that. Hopefully it won't work.

That's why I'm glad our government is set up the way it is: Slow! With 3 different branches, who at times can't seem to get anything done. It's almost like it was designed like that, huh? Maybe the founders knew a little something about human nature ;-)

While the chances of a ban passing the Senate seem pretty good barring a few senators sacking up and fillibustering and the pro's keeping the anti's from overriding it, I'm not sure the votes are there in the House. Boehner could simply not put it on the schedule to vote on to begin with.

In both the House and Senate how any vote goes will depend on what the legislator's mail looks like. Always, and without exception, the most important issue to them is getting reelected. The next most important thing is getting money needed to get reelected.

Some are in so-called "safe districts" and can consider reelection to be a sure thing. Most are not, and those are the ones we can reach. With all of the problems with economic conditions the last thing most of them want is another backlash.

Several key Democratic Senators are from states such as WV, which are mostly rural.

This seems to be the main possible tipping point.

The question concerning the "right" of women to vote, is the same as any other request for a change in law is concerned. They may pass the legislation, but most times these things are overturned on appeal.
The likellyhood of it being overturned by the higher court is very good.
The would have to decide if it or any bill was constitutional or not. A very high percentage of these types of legislation, are overturned on appeal.
My opinion is that it may become a law that gets struck down on appeal, especially if there is enough preassure put on these elected officials.
Even though judges are appointed in the supreme court, it won't hurt to see these legislators scurrying to try and get re elected by changing their vote if enough preassure is applied.
How many guys actually wrote letters is what I would like to know. If you can debate it here, you can also make your feelings known to ABC, NBC, CBS, and all of the elected officials, "i did", and continue to do so every day. I wrote the White House, my senators, all of my friends,co workers, family etc, If you aren't doing this and instead waiting for someone else to do it, we will fail from stopping it.
Post the NRA's statistics on your "facebook page", or "linked in", or "my space", etc. Act instead of complaining, the more noise we make now, the less we suffer.Like my attorney said to me once, I take care of the guy who is busting my chops first, the others can wait because they aren't calling me every 5 minutes.
This holds true for everyone. I just fought a legal case "out of state" to have POA, taken away from my mom for my aunt who is 99. They wanted to kick her out of the nursing home because she ran out of money after giving them close to 200,000 dollars.
Guess what, I won. You need to take initiative in order to keep your rights.
People will try to take away your freedoms until the day you die, unless you do something about it.
This country runs on Greed, and Power. But Fear is the underlying most effective measure to stop someone. If a politician is afraid of losing their job, they will change sides faster than an alien crossing the border.
We need to let our feelings be heard to the people who make the decisions, not just each other, I know many here already do that, but I am sure many don't. Now is the time to spend 20 minutes sending your feelings to as many people as you can, we have to "take this to them", in a way that is plain and simple, "if you pass this or vote for it" we will do everything possible to make sure you never get re elected again.
The "silent majority are pro gun" they are closet cases, but this past week showed how many folks bought up everything available and are backordered for months, There are more of us than there are of "them". Time to get on board.

"If we don’t cave in we can do it again." This is the key: we all need to push for no new legislation, and push hard. Now is the time to stand tall, not to bow in the wind with the attitude that additional regulation is inevitable. It's only inevitable if we give up.

One thing that I have not seen in the news media is: Did Nancy Lanza own a gun safe? If so, why wasn't the rifle and pistols locked up in it? Perhaps the ownership of a gun safe by all firearms owners mandated by federal law is something that could be offered up to deflect the "assault rifle" question.

^ ^ ^ ^

That was my biggest question,too,& living with that skinny neck geek she had to know he was a mental case,the last thing she should have done is introduced him to guns.they should have been locked in a safe with only her knowing the combination.I found it strange that she herself had a bushmaster. she might have shown him how to shoot so he wouldnt feel like such a nerd. if he wasnt such a shy little weasel, she would have been better off going on craigslist & getting him some hookers !

I REALLY liked this quote from Sen. Graham:

Speaking Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) said he owned an AR-15, an assault-style rifle, at his home and suggested that the solution isn't to take his firearm away but to provide better school security and focus more on mental health as a way to cut gun violence. "I don't suggest you take my right to buy an AR-15 away from me, because I don't think that it will work," he said.

Click to expand...

Article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323976104578197583848156580.html

If a few more will show some spine we can stop this thing.

It can probably pass a simple majority vote in the Senate but not in the House. Those guys aren't too eager to join the unemployment lines back in their respective states.