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

Stronger AWB by amendments to Feinstein Bill

Discussion in 'Legal' started by LAR-15, Jun 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. LAR-15

    LAR-15 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    3,385
    We know that Feinstein et al are merely hoping for a straight 10 year renewal BUT to bring it up they might have to agree to an amending process.

    We know radical groups like CSGV and VPC really want a stronger bill.

    What I am afraid of is that the VPC will get some anti gun senators like Lautenberg, Reid, Mikulski, Boxer, ect to propose amendments on top of Feinstein's bill.

    Such as:

    Ban on magazine imports

    Ban on transfer of pre 94 magazines

    Juvenile gun possession ban

    National Waiting period of 10 days for all "assault weapon" transfers

    ect.

    What do you think??
     
  2. LAR-15

    LAR-15 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    3,385
    Example leadership sells us out and forms an agreement to bring up and debate AWB renewal bill.

    And that agreement allows 6 amendments to be proposed and voted on by each side.

    Is this plausible?
     
  3. wally

    wally Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    12,365
    Location:
    Houston, Tx
    Get one of our friends in the Senate to add an amendment baning abortion!

    --wally.
     
  4. Greg L

    Greg L Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,381
    Location:
    Northern KY
    Add a couple of ammendments of our own repealing 1934 NFA, 1968 GCA, national CCW reciprocity, etc. Make them swallow the poison pill for a change.
     
  5. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Good. I hope they do.

    It's going to be virtualy impossible for them to get this thing passed as it is, let them load it down with more and more heavy handed gun control and watch the supporters drop like flies until only the handful of hardcore leftists vote for it.


    Just look at their last attempt.

    If they couldn't get an AWB extention passed when they tacked it onto something the Republicans like, then how are they supposed to get it passed on its own?


    I agree we have to keep our eyes open, but frankly they are just tilting at windmills here.
     
  6. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Too bad we don't have a Republican majority in the Senate, or we could just cut off pork until the leftist extremists sit down, shut up, and start acting like adults.
     
  7. boofus

    boofus Guest

    Maybe a senator with some brass ones can propose an amendment to ban abortion, ban affirmative action, seal the borders, and ban labor unions and then call for a vote in front of an empty chamber and get a 'unanimous' vote in favor. Like that BS the demokrats pulled during S1805.
     
  8. N3rday

    N3rday Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    778
    Ya know, the concept isn't bad; some of those in our favor should add some conservative amendments to some of HER bills!
     
  9. flatrock

    flatrock Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Messages:
    612
    I think that Feinstein introduced a bill that only extends the current ban, because that's what Bush said he'd sign.

    I think she realizes that Bush is not a gun control proponent, and that having ammendments give the President a reason to veto the bill.

    If she can get a bill through both houses, which I highly doubt, it would be very bad news for Bush. If he signed it, he's likely to lose a considerable number of votes over it. It he doesn't sign it, he's going to get attacked for flip-flopping on the issue.
     
  10. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    The thing with amendments, poison-pill or otherwise, is that you have to have a majority of the Senate vote for them in order to attach them to a bill.

    Remember, the antis proposed a lot more (and a lot nastier) bills than the ones that actually did get attached. The only realistic poison pill I can see is the lawsuit preemption bill. That was enough to kill the whole program in March unanimously, it should be enough to do it again and we know we have enough votes to get it attached to anything Feinstein proposes.

    We really need to lean on the wobbling Senators hard... Feingold (D-WI) voted with us last time; but it was iffy, we need to keep pressure on him. Allen (R-VA) changed his position at the last minute to support us. I think it is too late for him to flip again; but we need to make sure he doesn't.

    Graham (D-FL), Warner (R-FL), Breaux (D-LA), Edwards (D-NC), Hollings (D-SC) all voted against us last time and are retiring. Since they are retiring, probably the only one that isn't a lost cause is Edwards. Edwards has Presidential aspirations, so we need to let him know we will remember how he votes here.

    With the rest of the retiring Senators, about all you can do is threaten their party's hold on power and hope they care enough to listen.

    Are their any other wobbly Senators who are on the line and should get extra attention?
     
  11. Mr. Kook

    Mr. Kook Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Messages:
    105
    Location:
    Kansas
    If Republicans ammended the bill to include a ban on hunting ammo, like the dems did in March the bill would die immediately.

    I personally, would like to see them ammend the bill to allow selectfire and full auto weapons without restriction. If they let that happen and did away with the capacity restrictions I really couldn't care if the rest of the ban was renewed.
     
  12. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,938
    Location:
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    That would kill two birds with one stone! :p They would get their semi-automatic assault weapons banned, and we would get out full-autos back. With fll autos, who would want a semi auto anyway? Just flip the switch to 1 shot.

    Make an amendment changing the handgun purchasing and ammo purchasing to 18. That ammo law especially fails, all Ihave to do is say its for a carbine :rolleyes:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page