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

4 more Senators now oppose Toomey-Manchin amendment

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by ngnrd, Apr 16, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ngnrd

    ngnrd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2010
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    South Central Alaska
    From the give-credit-where-credit-is-due department:

    CNN TV's Situation Room is now reporting that four Senators [Saxby Chambliss, Richard Burr, Jeff Flake, and Roger Wicker, all Republicans] that "thought about supporting a compromise on gun control" now say that they will vote against the (Schumer-)Toomey-Manchin bill.

    I couldn't find the story on CNN.com, so I don't have a link to reference. But if true, it's another sign that the pressure is working. Keep it up!
     
  2. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,679
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    We need a link to verify.

    But if it's true, it's McDonalds. "I'm Lovin It!"
     
  3. ngnrd

    ngnrd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2010
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    South Central Alaska
    Finally found the story... They certainly didn't make it easy for me.:rolleyes:

    ---> LINK <---
     
  4. OilyPablo

    OilyPablo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,081
    Location:
    WA State (NOT in Seattle)
    So where is McCain?
     
  5. baz

    baz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    988
    As for McCain, he's voting for it.
     
  6. Ryanxia

    Ryanxia Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    4,447
    Location:
    'MURICA!
    Keep up the pressure, call your reps in their DC offices, tell them you expect them to OPPOSE this Bill and others like it.
     
  7. Queen_of_Thunder

    Queen_of_Thunder member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,881
    Location:
    Where God purifies the soul. The West Texas desert
    Tell them instead of passing another law that does nothing how about they just enforce the laws already on the books. Its a win win for everyone.
     
  8. AirForceShooter

    AirForceShooter Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,763
    Location:
    Central Florida
    I'm trying to figure out how ANY dem Senator would vote for it.

    National Carry OMG

    AFS
     
  9. hunttheevil

    hunttheevil Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    NE Florida
    Let's hope there are no mysterious votes at 3am! We all know how that works out!
     
  10. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,168
    Location:
    Virginia
    The latest Huffington Post whip count shows 52 senators in favor of the Manchin-Toomey plan, 39 opposed, and 9 yet to announce their position.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/15/gun-control-vote_n_3085610.html?

    Under Senate rules, it will take 60 votes to add this to the underlying bill.

    There are feverish negotiations underway to add an exemption for people at least 100 miles away from the nearest FFL, in hopes of getting Lisa Murkowski to switch and support the plan. As a result, the vote on the amendment will probably be put off until later this week or early next week.

    Another factor is whether the more-palatable Coburn plan (free Internet portal, buyer pre-qualification) is voted on before or after the Manchin-Toomey plan. If it's scheduled after the Manchin-Toomey vote, more senators will be tempted to vote "no" on Manchin-Toomey when there's the prospect of covering themselves by voting "yes" on Coburn.

    If the Manchin-Toomey plan fails, then the usual-suspect antigun senators will be faced with the prospect of voting "yes" on Coburn, or getting nothing at all.
     
  11. Ryanxia

    Ryanxia Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    4,447
    Location:
    'MURICA!
    I'm asking my Senators to OPPOSE this Bill regardless of the amendments to it, Lanza STOLE the guns he used, this would not have prevented Sandy Hook and is just another infringement. Stand strong.
     
  12. MErl

    MErl Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,283

    push too hard on the theft side and there will be a safe storage requirement popping up. be careful.

    (yes I know it still wouldn't have stopped him. He lived in the house and likely knew any safe combination)
     
  13. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,168
    Location:
    Virginia
    Suppose we get the Coburn plan plus nationwide reciprocity plus repeal of the Hughes Amendment. Would you still be opposed to the underlying bill? (My own opinion is that we have to be flexible if we want to make progress on the pro-gun agenda.)
     
  14. David E

    David E Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,455
    I guess I missed all the pro-gun counter offers to all the anti-gun proposals in the effort to reach a "compromise."

    Has Chuck U Schumer said, "give us the UBC and we will open up the registry for full auto."
     
  15. HankR

    HankR Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Messages:
    542
    Location:
    upper midwest
    The HuffPo link above also lists the fence sitters. These are the ones that need the phonecalls and emails, ASAP.

    This is a bad bill, and needs to be stopped.
     
  16. Aikibiker

    Aikibiker Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    517
    Location:
    Daytona, Fl
    Add in some poison pill amendments need to added. Repeal of 922o would be my preference.
     
  17. Ryanxia

    Ryanxia Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    4,447
    Location:
    'MURICA!
    National reciprocity I do not think would be a good thing. While it might be convenient, I don't want the federal government deciding on my renewals and it being a federal matter. Keep the power in the states, even if it is only good in your state.

    Also the 'cover you when traveling' is already a law that is just not enforced.
     
  18. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,414
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    The Manchin-Toomey background check deal may be in trouble:

    http://news.yahoo.com/gun-background-check-deal-jeopardy-senate-213247266--politics.html
     
  19. MagnumDweeb

    MagnumDweeb Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,344
    Location:
    Central Florida
    I'm surprised how many Dems from otherwise gun friendly states voted "yes" on this.

    Maine
    Virginia
    Vermont
    New Hampshire
    Nevada
    Montana
    Virginia
    West Virginia
    South Dakota

    Yeesh I hope the Republicans take those seats next election. Had they voted otherwise it'd be 48 versus 43 with the 48 likely on our side.

    I honestly thought Missouri, Oregon, and Ohio were gun friendly but I don't know.
     
  20. mrvco

    mrvco Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Messages:
    697
    Location:
    Colorado
    I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but we already have "gun control".

    If they'd just remove the restriction on intrastate "On-line Sales"... I like the idea of allowing interstate FFL dealer sales and CCW Permits obviating the requirement for a background check with each firearms purchase from an FFL Dealer.
     
  21. Dframe

    Dframe Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Messages:
    992
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    PRESSURE needs to be brought to bear. This horrible bill needs to be STOPPED!
    This is the first step in banning ALL private sales, and forcing EVERY transfer to go through an FFL so there is a FEDERAL RECORD of the gun and it's owner. Pre-cursor to registration and confiscation. Guns are already being confiscated in certain jurisdictions around the country. IMAGINE what some future leftwing congress could do with a list of every gun and owner.
     
  22. ngnrd

    ngnrd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2010
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    South Central Alaska
    And what of those of us that live in free states; states who's residents don't have to ask permission from the government to exercise our rights? You know... the states with no CCW permit requirement.

    Or what about the folks in the slave states that don't have a CCW, but want to sell their deer/duck gun?

    Would you trample on our rights to feel like you get some of yours back?

    No. We need to stick together on this. Registration is bad. And UBC's, no matter how palatable they try to make them, just bring us one more step closer to registration.

    Don't be fooled. If this passes, the next tragedy will have them screaming to close the "UBC loophole". You know, the one that allows me to sell a firearm to a family member or friend. Then, the next time, they will be calling for universal registration because obviously background checks aren't effective at stopping criminals. You see where this path ends, don't you?
     
  23. Godsgunman

    Godsgunman Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    631
    Location:
    Olathe, KS
    No Compromise at all! Unless of course they want to add an amendment to it that says they can have UBCs but there will be no further infringement allowed. No further attack on 2a will be tolerated and whoever were to try would be removed from their political office and tried for treason post haste. UBCs would be limited to a 3 day period max and no person can be denied ability to obtain a firearm without a felony conviction or charges on file. No magazine limits either. That will be our "compromise" or NO DEAL!
    Obviously they would never go for that so I stick with what I said before, NO COMPROMISE!
     
  24. Godsgunman

    Godsgunman Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    631
    Location:
    Olathe, KS
    Plus all Draconian state laws like those in NY and Cali must be stricken unconstitutional and overturned.
     
  25. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,168
    Location:
    Virginia
    That's fine -- if we were starting with a clean slate. The fact is, we already have gun control, and that's unlikely to change. The discussion now is about the parameters of the control. We want to move in the direction of more freedom, while the antis want to move in the direction of less freedom. This is the battlefield on which both sides maneuver. No general ever won a battle without being flexible.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page