Did Your Senator Vote To Allow The Gun Bill To Move Forward?

P

pspr

If so, call, mail or email him a stern warning regarding your next vote.
---

Among the 68 who voted to proceed on the bill this morning are 16 Republicans. Per Chad Pergram:

Alexander
Ayotte
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Collins
Corker
Flake
Graham
Heller
Hoeven
Isakson
Kirk
McCain
Toomey
Wicker

Democrats voting against proceeding: Just two, Mark Pryor and Mark Begich. Everyone else in the caucus except for Frank Lautenberg, who was absent, voted yes. A message to red-state Dems (and aisle-crossing Republicans) from the NRA:

We hope the Senate will replace the current provisions of S. 649 with language that is properly focused on addressing mental health inadequacies; prosecuting violent criminals; and keeping our kids safe in their schools. Should it fail to do so, the NRA will make an exception to our standard policy of not “scoring” procedural votes and strongly oppose a cloture motion to move to final passage of S. 649.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/04/...on-gun-control-bill-thanks-to-16-republicans/
 
Looks like both my senators voted for, I didn't vote for either last election and damn sure won't vote for them in the next.
 
Although it isn't out of the Senate yet, it sounds like Boehner may let it come up for a vote in the House even if there isn't a majority of Republicans voting for it. He's either talking about guns or immigration. Either way, he is a traitor if he does.
 
They probably think their vote won't matter because it goes down in flames in the house. Guess again, traitors. Enjoy your power while you have it. Of course, we knew which ones would side with the left anyway. It's the others that were such a disappointment

I wonder how many of them would have voted if we had term limits. In fact, I wonder what congress would actually look like if we had term limits.
 
Now the republicans are claiming they let it come up for a vote so they can offer amendments. Apparently Reid has agreed to allow amendments, something he normally doesn't allow.

One amendment being pushed by the NRA would mandate that CCW permits be recognized nationwide. Apparently, it has a good chance of being adopted. It is viewed by supporters of gun control as a killer amendment, since they would rather have no bill than pass that. There are also amendments making it easier for gun shopts to sella cross state lines.

The tradeoff for this would probably be increased requirements for approvals for gun sales that do not now require it.

I am frankly very suspicious of this whole mess. I know there are RINO senators out there just looking for a chance to backstab us. In addition, I think there are valid federalism concerns that argue against requiring nationwide recipcrocity of CCW permits. If they can pass a law mandating national CCW, they can pass a law prohibiting it. Just saying...
 
The nationwide Concealed weapons reciprocity amendment would be a very good attachement. It would force states like California, Maryland and New York to recognize out of state CCW licenses, and in my opinion the republicans and pro-gun democrats should ram it down the throats of the anti-gunners. The pro-gun senators need to grow a backbone and tell the anti-gunners that if they want their expanded background checks then they must accept this bill, or they get nothing...and actually mean it.

CCW holders undergo very through background checks, so this does not undermine the expanded background check idea. Also in a compromise everyone should get something, not just one side getting half of what they want. If the anti-gunners hate this so much then they can kill their own bill and walk away with nothing.
 
Quote from Trader7793:

The nationwide Concealed weapons reciprocity amendment would be a very good attachement. It would force states like California, Maryland and New York to recognize out of state CCW licenses, and in my opinion the republicans and pro-gun democrats should ram it down the throats of the anti-gunners. The pro-gun senators need to grow a backbone and tell the anti-gunners that if they want their expanded background checks then they must accept this bill, or they get nothing...and actually mean it.

CCW holders undergo very through background checks, so this does not undermine the expanded background check idea. Also in a compromise everyone should get something, not just one side getting half of what they want. If the anti-gunners hate this so much then they can kill their own bill and walk away with nothing.
More...
I'm inclined to agree. DL's are certainly honored in all 50 states, so why not CCW permits?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top