PDA

View Full Version : Coburn Takes Out the Guns: GOP Plans Series of Gun Amendments


timdps
02-04-2010, 8:22 AM
Found this while browsing the Brady site:

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_87/news/42975-1.html


By John Stanton
Roll Call Staff
Feb. 4, 2010, 12 a.m.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) has quietly been preparing a series of gun rights amendments that he intends to offer to must-pass Senate bills this year, hoping to force Democrats to take tough votes and draw clear distinctions between the two parties heading into the midterms.

jdberger
02-04-2010, 8:29 AM
It's funny, but it seems as if most of the folks browsing the Brady (or LCAV, VPC, Gun Guys) sites are gunnies doing recon.....

yellowfin
02-04-2010, 9:11 AM
It's funny, but it seems as if most of the folks browsing the Brady (or LCAV, VPC, Gun Guys) sites are gunnies doing recon.....Considering we probably outnumber them 100 or 200 to 1 that's not surprising. If we could get the gunnies in more states than just just CA, PA, VA, OH, and GA to fight as hard there wouldn't be a square inch of US soil for the anti gun people to stand on.

shooting4life
02-04-2010, 9:31 AM
I wonder what they have up their sleeves.

Jpach
02-04-2010, 9:38 AM
I wonder what they have up their sleeves.

If they had an '86 MG ban killer, that would be awesome

wildhawker
02-04-2010, 9:53 AM
It's funny, but it seems as if most of the folks browsing the Brady (or LCAV, VPC, Gun Guys) sites are gunnies doing recon.....

:whistling:

timdps
02-04-2010, 10:17 AM
It's funny, but it seems as if most of the folks browsing the Brady (or LCAV, VPC, Gun Guys) sites are gunnies doing recon.....


:chris: Arrrrrrr.....
What's funny is that I type "Brady violence" into Google and the first listing is the Brady website...

tim

tiki
02-04-2010, 10:28 AM
:chris: Arrrrrrr.....
What's funny is that I type "Brady violence" into Google and the first listing is the Brady website...

tim

What were you expecting, an article about Marsha beating up Jan?
:)

7x57
02-04-2010, 10:57 AM
Heh. *Perfect timing.* :43: I think Gene predicted that 2010 would be a great year to introduce pro-gun legislation, and as things are shaping up he could not be more right. Scott Brown's election is causing near-revolt among the rank-and-file, and that's over issues they (apparently) thought were OK. They thought guns were poison from the get-go, so this will ramp up the pressure a lot.

If we got a bill in there to restore the registry it wouldn't pass but voting against it might cost them another seat or two come November, and best of all they'd know it. Remember that they've been listening to Bill Clinton--one reason to make health care a priority is that Bill told them not passing HillaryCare was one reason they lost congress in '94. Well, he also told them the other reason was the AW ban. There is never a bad time to sow terror among anti-gunners. :43:

Unfortunately we can't take anti-gun Republican scalps that way, but let's not look a gift horse in the mouth.

I would also get to listen to the pleasant sound of outraged squawking from the kamikaze media. :43:

7x57

Window_Seat
02-04-2010, 11:21 AM
Anyone want venture that one of those amendments could be a reciprocity measure?

Erik.

bulgron
02-04-2010, 11:25 AM
How about an amendment like this? For the purposes of legally carrying a firearm for the core lawful purpose of self-defense, a "sensitive federal area" shall be defined to be only those places protected by armed guards and/or metal detectors in sufficient quantities to reasonably guarantee the safety of all who visit the area.

7x57
02-04-2010, 11:26 AM
Oh, yeah, one more thing. This terror and confusion in the ranks of antigunners was brought to you by the letters A, Z, and your friendly neighborhood Tea Party. :D

7x57

nobody_special
02-04-2010, 11:28 AM
Bulgron, that would be very nice but I think it will never happen.

Both houses of Congress still have a Democratic majority, and the President has veto power. Don't get your hopes up for any pro-gun bills. I suspect the only way to get a pro-gun bill passed would be to attach it to the health care overhaul.

choprzrul
02-04-2010, 11:30 AM
I would also get to listen to the pleasant sound of outraged squawking from the kamikaze media. :43:

7x57

^^Priceless!^^

dantodd
02-04-2010, 11:32 AM
Bulgron, that would be very nice but I think it will never happen.

Both houses of Congress still have a Democratic majority, and the President has veto power. Don't get your hopes up for any pro-gun bills. I suspect the only way to get a pro-gun bill passed would be to attach it to the health care overhaul.

If you read the OP carefully you will see:

gun rights amendments that he intends to offer to must-pass Senate bills

His intention is to attach them to bills the congress will pass and the president must sign. (e.g. Credit Card bail out)

7x57
02-04-2010, 11:32 AM
Bulgron, that would be very nice but I think it will never happen.

Both houses of Congress still have a Democratic majority, and the President has veto power. Don't get your hopes up for any pro-gun bills. I suspect the only way to get a pro-gun bill passed would be to attach it to the health care overhaul.

Doesn't matter. We want to make them hate the very thought of gun control legislation. We want to program them like Pavlov's dogs to duck and wince if the very idea is mentioned by smacking them upside the head with a bat every time a bad thought goes through their little pinheads. For that purpose, every bit of pain we can associate with it, the better. Giving them a choice between voting for it and risking losing some pro-gun democratic votes they will not be able to afford to lose is a good way to drive the lesson home.

And it needs to be driven home over and over and over and over again.

Sometimes, inflicting suffering on anti-gun politicians isn't just recreational and therapeutic, it's also strategic. :43:

7x57

Aegis
02-04-2010, 12:17 PM
This is good news. Many moderate Democrats have had a wake-up call and realize that the elections in November could be terrible for them. The last thing that many moderate Democrats want to do is upset gun owners and be labeled anti-2A. The American people are already angry with ballooning deficits and 20% unemployment.

BigDogatPlay
02-04-2010, 12:21 PM
Turnabout is fair play.... in the school yard and in politics.

When the Democrats were in the minority and out of the White House, they often attempted to attach amendments to "must pass" bills, in particular to continuing resolutions that kept the government funded when no one could get a budget passed. It is a trick that is allowed by the rules and has brought us, among other things, the Tiahrt Amendment that keeps Mayor Bloomberg's PIs and snoops out of BATFE gun trace information.

By putting in what would be potentially polarizing issues that resonate with voters in red states (that elected blue representatives over the past couple cycles), the differences between parties and agendas can be drawn into sharper focus.

And elections can be won........ :)

Also.... while 50 state reciprocity on CCW is a wonderful concept, I doubt very seriously that it would pass a 10th Amendment smell test, just as key elements of the Brady Bill did not. Just as the LEOSA would not, if anyone ever cared to challenge it.

MolonLabe2008
02-04-2010, 1:01 PM
If they had an '86 MG ban killer, that would be awesome

......this^ :D

7x57
02-04-2010, 1:03 PM
If they had an '86 MG ban killer, that would be awesome

My God, I just realized the implications. A second firearm-then-ammo shortage. With more FA, the ammo shortage might never end. :eek:

7x57

dustoff31
02-04-2010, 1:13 PM
Also.... while 50 state reciprocity on CCW is a wonderful concept, I doubt very seriously that it would pass a 10th Amendment smell test, just as key elements of the Brady Bill did not. Just as the LEOSA would not, if anyone ever cared to challenge it.

Wasn't the court ruling and the 10A issue with the Brady bill that it required state and local gov'ts to do something (conduct background checks) and incur costs (unfunded mandate) in doing so?

How would one state honoring another states CCW, or LEOSA card, require them to do anything or incur costs?

It doesn't seem to be a problem with driver's licenses.

nobody_special
02-04-2010, 1:43 PM
My God, I just realized the implications. A second firearm-then-ammo shortage. With more FA, the ammo shortage might never end. :eek:

7x57

That's why I'm dreaming of a full-auto .22LR belt-fed AR upper... :chris:

But it's not going to happen in my lifetime I suspect.

dantodd
02-04-2010, 1:56 PM
Also.... while 50 state reciprocity on CCW is a wonderful concept, I doubt very seriously that it would pass a 10th Amendment smell test, just as key elements of the Brady Bill did not. Just as the LEOSA would not, if anyone ever cared to challenge it.

I suspect that it could be managed under the full faith and credit clause. It is a license no different than a drivers' or marriage license. Except that the right to bear arms is constitutionally enumerated, unlike driving and marriage.

quiet-wyatt
02-04-2010, 3:14 PM
Unfortunately we can't take anti-gun Republican scalps that way, but let's not look a gift horse in the mouth.

Too late!

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb304/quiet-wyatt/Avatars/1bd22777.jpg

bulgron
02-04-2010, 3:22 PM
I suspect that it could be managed under the full faith and credit clause. It is a license no different than a drivers' or marriage license. Except that the right to bear arms is constitutionally enumerated, unlike driving and marriage.

Yeah, but I'm not sure that either marriage or drivers licenses were ever forced on the states by the courts using any clause in the constitution. Didn't they voluntarily decide to honor one another's licenses? It would be interesting to see that court case, though.

RRangel
02-04-2010, 3:31 PM
Putting the anti-gun Senators on the skyline during election is a masterful plan. I can't wait until election time.

CCWFacts
02-04-2010, 4:36 PM
It's funny, but it seems as if most of the folks browsing the Brady (or LCAV, VPC, Gun Guys) sites are gunnies doing recon.....

Haha, probably so! I certainly look at that site more frequently than I look at the NRA site.

My #1 wish is a national reciprocity bill. The Thune Amendment (http://thune.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=26677f6a-9285-43c0-8659-f390c282867e&Month=7&Year=2009) last year came within a couple of votes of passing. This session, I expect it would pass. Cool!

My #2 wish would be to open up the MG registry for new registration. Even if it's very limited, like opening them to entertainment prop companies, that would be a good start. You notice that in movies filmed here, they can never show modern FA weapons? It's always AKs and M16s? Whereas movies filmed in Canada and other places can have P90s and so on. I'm sure some Hollywood prop companies would love to get a chance to buy modern FA weapons, because what they're showing us is looking rather dated, especially to a generation that has grown up seeing the latest toys in realistic video games. So open up the MG registry!

Ford8N
02-04-2010, 5:21 PM
Really, really simple...strike 922r and define "sporting purpose".

grammaton76
02-04-2010, 5:27 PM
My #1 wish is a national reciprocity bill. The Thune Amendment (http://thune.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=26677f6a-9285-43c0-8659-f390c282867e&Month=7&Year=2009) last year came within a couple of votes of passing. This session, I expect it would pass. Cool!

Don't forget the way politics are played.

When you have more than enough votes to kill something, you can tell your guys on a "moderate" ticket that it's ok to vote for it because it won't pass anyway. Then they can say, "We tried" to their constituents.

Bills generally will look close until you run out of "We Tried" politicians and everyone is voting against it who WILL vote against it and it STILL passes.

Hunt
02-04-2010, 6:50 PM
Oh, yeah, one more thing. This terror and confusion in the ranks of antigunners was brought to you by the letters A, Z, and your friendly neighborhood Tea Party. :D

7x57

you mean the bogus "astro turf" people that really don't feel that way just faking it.:D

AJAX22
02-04-2010, 7:06 PM
Hehehehe...


this is deliciously strategic...


I'm just glad they're learning.... when folks are broke, hungry, paying 40+% of what they can scrape together in taxes to support the loafers and the thief's....

It would be a really really bad thing to piss off the armed folks...

We have long memories.

We may not be able to scalp, but we can count coup on our enemies..

I suggest you call your congress critter and arrange to meet with them....

Thank them for what they've done that's PRO gun, and chastise (lobby) them for what they've done that's anti gun.

If you think a letter gets the job done.... you should see what a little face time will do...

hoffmang
02-04-2010, 9:20 PM
Yeah, but I'm not sure that either marriage or drivers licenses were ever forced on the states by the courts using any clause in the constitution. Didn't they voluntarily decide to honor one another's licenses? It would be interesting to see that court case, though.

There is plenty of room for Congress to force reciprocity under the Full Faith and Credit Clause. However, there is certainly room under Section 5 of the 14th amendment.

-Gene

Can'thavenuthingood
02-04-2010, 10:02 PM
Doesn't matter. We want to make them hate the very thought of gun control legislation. We want to program them like Pavlov's dogs to duck and wince if the very idea is mentioned by smacking them upside the head with a bat every time a bad thought goes through their little pinheads. For that purpose, every bit of pain we can associate with it, the better. Giving them a choice between voting for it and risking losing some pro-gun democratic votes they will not be able to afford to lose is a good way to drive the lesson home.

And it needs to be driven home over and over and over and over again.

Sometimes, inflicting suffering on anti-gun politicians isn't just recreational and therapeutic, it's also strategic. :43:

7x57

YES, YES, YES, this has been my mission and the reason I got into the Calguns logo on everyone's back and hat.
I want those politicians knees to shudder and shake everytime they see a Calguns logo around them at a rally, the Capital, the TV News.

Putting them on the skyline as said is a terrific idea, make them commit to something.

At least make uncomfortable in their skin.

Vick

repeal17thamendment
02-05-2010, 12:25 AM
Notice that stinkin' "roll call" wants us to pay to read the article :mad:

Mulay El Raisuli
02-05-2010, 5:35 AM
Yeah, but I'm not sure that either marriage or drivers licenses were ever forced on the states by the courts using any clause in the constitution. Didn't they voluntarily decide to honor one another's licenses? It would be interesting to see that court case, though.


IIRC, the case that forced "full faith & credit" in re marriages was actually a case involving divorce. It used to be (back in the way long ago time) that if you wanted to divorce quickly & with no muss, no fuss, you went to the state of Nevada. The residency requirement was only 6 (?) weeks. So the wife would go to Nevada (Reno was popular for this) & sit in a cheap apartment for however long the residency requirement was. Once the required amount of time was passed, the wife filed, the husband didn't fight it & viola, they were now divorced.

The problem came because other states didn't recognize divorces from Nevada. Guys were being arrested for adultery & bigamy when they re-married. Someone appealed this to SCOTUS. Which ruled that as states had to give "full faith & credit" to other acts of the various states, they had to do so in re Nevada & its divorce laws also, as long as they allowed divorce at all.

I don't remember the case name & I'm far too lazy to look it up, but this is how it went, as I recall.

The importance to us here (since I like to relate everything to guns) is that this is yet another example of the groundwork already being done for us. Unless a state is willing to outlaw CCW completely, existing precedent will force reciprocity on the PRK & everyone else (presuming someone good leads the charge in court). The value of McDonald is that it will let us use the tools already lying about. We not only don't have to re-invent the wheel, we waste time & resources by trying.


The Raisuli


Edited to add: If I also remember correctly, "full Faith & Credit" was given to NV's divorce laws via a criminal case. The value to us is that, again, criminal cases move much faster through the system than civil cases. The best way to get reciprocity would be the defense of an appropriate criminal defendant popped for CCW. Someone who does have a CCW from his home state but not in the state he was arrested in.