Quantcast

CSPAN thread for Tuesday 03/02/04

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Preacherman, Mar 1, 2004.

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

    Preacherman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,306
    Location:
    Louisiana, USA
    Please use this thread for the ongoing discussion of events in the Senate.

    In case anyone's wondering why we started new threads for each day: if you click on a thread, the entire thread is loaded. With these Senate threads running into so many pages, this places an enormous load on the server, and degrades the performance of THR. By starting a new thread, we minimize the load on the database each day.

    Here's hoping for a positive outcome! We should know by this time tomorrow...
     
  2. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    Debate will begin at 9:30am on McCain's gunshow background check amendment, followed by Feinstein's AWB amendment, and then Hatch's repeal of the DC gun ban amendment.

    Starting at 11:35am Eastern, there will be a series of stacked votes on any amendments not yet considered (the ones above plus law enforcement CCW, AP ammo, and another attempt to gut S.1805 by Reed or Levin). It is my understanding that any amendments not voted on tomorrow within the allotted time will expire (same as voted down).

    Currently the following amendments have been attached:

    1. Boxer Amdt. No. 2620 As Amended; To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to require the provision of a child safety device in connection with the transfer of a handgun and to provide safety standards for child safety devices.

    Plain language: requires manufacturers to sell a child safety device with every handgun. Provides immunity from qualified civil liability suits to gun owners who use one.

    2. Frist Amdt. No. 2628; To exempt any lawsuit involving a shooting victim of John Allen Muhammad or John Lee Malvo from the definition of qualified civil liability action that meets certain requirements.

    The "certain requirements" are those outline in S.1805 - so basically if you were a DC sniper victim and you could sue under S.1805 before this amendment was attached, you still can. If you couldn't sue before this amendment was attached you still cannot sue - so basically this changes nothing in the bill.

    Entire text of this amendment below:

    Purpose: To protect the rights of law enforcement officers who are victimized by crime to secure compensation from those who participate in the arming of criminals) On page 9, between lines 21 and 22, insert the following:

    (E) LAW ENFORCEMENT EXCEPTION.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the right of an officer or employee of any Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency to recover damages authorized under Federal or State law in a civil action that meets 1 of the requirements under clauses (i) through (v) of subparagraph (A).


    3. Frist Amdt. No. 2630; To protect the rights of law enforcement officers who are victimized by crime to secure compensation from those who participate in the arming of criminals.

    Same as DC Sniper bill - does nothing new...entire text of bill is below:

    (Purpose: To protect the rights of law enforcement officers who are victimized by crime to secure compensation from those who participate in the arming of criminals) On page 9, between lines 21 and 22, insert the following:

    (E) LAW ENFORCEMENT EXCEPTION.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the right of an officer or employee of any Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency to recover damages authorized under Federal or State law in a civil action that meets 1 of the requirements under clauses (i) through (v) of subparagraph (A)."
     
  3. Moparmike

    Moparmike Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,600
    Location:
    Oddly enough, a downwardly-plunging firey handbask
    Can we have a link to the live feed for tomorrow?
     
  4. Frohickey

    Frohickey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,018
    Location:
    People's Republic of California
    The way I do it is go over to www.cspan.org.
    Then I click on the C-SPAN under the TV Schedules on the left, this brings up new page.
    Then I click on C-Span2 Real Player Standalone on the right, after I check what is playing.
     
  5. BlackTalon

    BlackTalon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    7
  6. Bill St. Clair

    Bill St. Clair Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    274
    Location:
    Upstate New York
    Bartholomew Roberts corrected me about Hutchison's vote on the original AWB. She DID vote for the original version of H.R. 3355, but that one did NOT contain the AWB. After the addition of the AWB, she voted NO.
     
  7. aquapong

    aquapong Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2003
    Messages:
    329
    Location:
    Phx, AZ
    If the amendments not voted on by 1130 are killed, why don't the Republicans stage a mass no show until 1130? No quorom, no voting.
     
  8. dustind

    dustind Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,582
    Location:
    St. Michael, MN
    aquapong: Wouldn't there be a quroum of anti gunners, and thus a vote of ~50-0 in favor of the AWB, and gun show loophole?
     
  9. Brett Bellmore

    Brett Bellmore Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    Capac, Michigan
    If that's the case, then the AWB is going to pass anyway, right? No, the real problem is that if not quite enough Republicans left to prevent a quorum, (And every last one of them would have to leave to make it work.) then the 40 some Democrats would outvote the few Republicans who remained. And you KNOW the RINOs would stick around for just that reason.
     
  10. Harry Tuttle

    Harry Tuttle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    3,093
    Nice Chess move

    Has anyone one else noticed that Bill Frist has pulled Kerry and Edwards off the campaign trail on Super Tuesday to vote for gun control?
     
  11. GigaBuist

    GigaBuist Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    2,261
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Yeah... that's a wake-up call for me. They're not just blindly following the crowd on this one, they're going out of their way to take my guns away. So far out of the way that they'll throw away a day of campaigning for it.

    Me thinks I need to hit ammoman.com again.
     
  12. Boats

    Boats member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    3,705
    Location:
    Oregon
    I just called Edwards' office. I don't know if he will be in today, but I asked his staffer to ask Mr. Edwards to provide me with some evidence he is more electable than the Massachusetts liberal he is running against by voting against amending S. 1805 if he happens to be in town for the vote.

    Calling Senator Smith again.
     
  13. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    No kidding... anybody who thinks the Dems are moderating their pro-gun control stance better wake up. Kerry missed 128 days where the Senate was voting and every vote since he started campaigning; but he is coming back for this one. Same for Edwards - missed every vote so far; but giving up any super Tuesday edge in a race where this is his last shot to win JUST to pass gun control laws.
     
  14. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    S.1805 Debate beginning...
     
  15. Boats

    Boats member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    3,705
    Location:
    Oregon
    I just called Kerry's office. "I note that Mr. Kerry is running for President this year. I also note that he has missed almost every vote in the Senate for the past six months but that he is coming in today to specifically vote against gun rights. I do not appreciate his lack of committment to freedom and will not under any circumstances vote for him in November if he votes to amend S. 1805."

    I kinda got the sense that they knew I already would never vote for him. I reminded them I live in a swing state out here in Oregon, where most of us like our guns just fine and we have no state AWB.
     
  16. Bruce H

    Bruce H Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,624
    Location:
    North Mo.
    We will have a verbatum record of the lies the anti's spout today. Could be useful to beat them with later. Too bad oratory in front of the senate can't be classified as perjury.
     
  17. ClonaKilty

    ClonaKilty Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2003
    Messages:
    272
    Location:
    Pacific NW
    For what it's worth: Florida Senators' Numbers:

    Sen. Graham: (202) 224-3041
    Sen Nelson: (202) 224-5274

    Both sets of staffers have been very polite and I can hear them typing into a computer terminal as I request to "Support 1805 and oppose Sen. Feinstein's amendment to ban certain semi-auto rifles." Sen. Nelsons's staffers will ask for your Zip code.
     
  18. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    OK, there will be 3 votes starting at 11:35am...they will recess until 2:15pm Eastern for meetings and then finish the rest of the votes and the final vote on the bill
     
  19. starfuryzeta

    starfuryzeta Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    313
    Location:
    FL, USA
    Both are pretty much a lost cause. Nelson is a little more open, but Graham is not. Graham is on his way out, anyways, so he's gonna vote for the AWB, and it pretty much won't matter what you think.
     
  20. Baba Louie

    Baba Louie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,831
    Will Cheney show up today?
     
  21. tfurey19

    tfurey19 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Messages:
    88
    Location:
    NYC
    If you got time

    Feingold (202) 224-5323
    Dorgan (202) 224-2551
    Conrad (202) 224-2043
    Voinovich (202) 224-3353
    Smith (202) 224-3753
    Fitzgerald (202) 224-2854
    Lugar (202) 224-4814

    Call Now!
     
  22. Boats

    Boats member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    3,705
    Location:
    Oregon
    This is off to a fast start.:rolleyes:
     
  23. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    McCain up to push the gunshow background check that his masters at AGS have paid him to push. Lieberman named as co-sponsor along with several of the usual suspects.
     
  24. Jack T.

    Jack T. Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Great State of Oklahoma
    Man, McCain is talking about FASTER instant checks. . .How do you get faster than instant?
     
  25. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    3-day maximum wait on background checks and states can apply for a 24-hour maximum delay after a three-year delay. Have to have 95% of state misdemeanor, felony and restraining order records automated and available to NICS in order to qualify for 24-hr. check.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice