Schumer’s move a good start to eventually taking all guns away from everyone
This story gives me hope that the Obama plan to take all guns away from everyone is finally getting its pants on.
Reacting to the mass shooting in a gay nightclub in Orlando, allegedly by a self-proclaimed ISIS sympathizer, Senate Democrats plan to push legislation once again to keep people on the federal government’s terrorist watch list from buying guns.
In a conference call with reporters Monday, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and other Democratic senators said the Orlando attack had motivated Democrats to bring back the “Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015,” a bill Democrats had tried and failed to pass in December after the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California.
“We will find a way to bring this to a vote,” Schumer said Monday. “This is the first thing we are going to attempt because it is the most relevant.”
Of course this has nothing at all to do with taking all guns away from everyone, but it lifts my spirits a but to think that some simpleton gun nut will read the headline and take it at face value.
Won’t happen.
@TK “Won’t happen.”
Of course it will happen. It’s just a question of when.
Can you imagine a bunch of yahoos running around with assault weapons in America in the year 2116? I sure can’t.
The NRA is on the losing side of history. It will one day be looked upon that way we now look back on the noose… somewhat barbaric and not really necessary.
Why can’t liberals read and understand a simple one-sentence amendment?
There is no Constitutional right to own or drive a car.
There IS a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and SCOTUS has signed off on the individual right.
Rights are rights. They’re “god-given.”
Feel free to shit all over the gun nuts. I’m with you!
That said, nothing will change until WE change the 2nd amendment. I’m in my late ’40s. I don’t think the 2nd amendment will be modified or repealed in my lifetime.
Your contempt for the 2nd amendment is only eclipsed by your contempt for the 1st.
Clearly evidenced by your repeated censoring of those who you consider “gun nuts”
If your ideas are so logical & correct. Why do you feel the need to censor those with opposing views?
At the rate that the world is going, in 2116 one could easily predict that the world will be taken over by ISIS style zealots. Hopefully, enough Americans will still be armed sufficiently enough to maintain at least pockets of freedom.
@L “That said, nothing will change until WE change the 2nd amendment.”
Not true. All that needs to happen is that the USSC finally notices that there’s a comma in the 2nd amendment… you know… the way it was actually written.
@hwga “At the rate that the world is going, in 2116 one could easily predict that the world will be taken over by ISIS style zealots.”
At the rate that the world is going??? Easily predict?? How’s that???
Haven’t you heard that we are in The Great Peace (since WWII), and that a smaller percentage of people are now dying by violence than at any time in recorded human history. And that fraction continues to drop. And if you want it to drop even further… just get rid of the weapons, as most nations have done.
So where is your doom and gloom coming from??
Have you been listening to idiots?
I love how these simpletons rush to prove my thesis.
“Why can’t liberals read and understand a simple one-sentence amendment?”
The question is why conservatives can’t understand that the right to bear arms and the right to form a militia are linked for a reason. Original intent indeed.
“There IS a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and SCOTUS has signed off on the individual right.”
By overturning precedent. All previous cases found that the pesky clause about the militia actually meant something.
“I love how these simpletons rush to prove my thesis.”
Absolutely love the respect that you show toward those who have a different opinion that yours.
But then again, I should know that Liberal/Progressive these days means one party totalitarian government.
“But then again, I should know that Liberal/Progressive these days means one party totalitarian government.”
You could save yourself considerable time by simply writing “Insert cliche.”
@hwga “Absolutely love the respect that you show toward those who have a different opinion that yours.”
Respect is earned. Did you post something that warranted respect?
Oh.. And those who stomp around and demand respect are usually the ones who are least deserving of such. Trump is your poster boy for that.
Speaking specifically towards the proposed bill. Through 2015, 2,477 names of would-be gun and explosives buyers were on the watch list. There are also 800 Americans on the no fly list. If there is no justification for person being on the list, there should be a means of removing them from the list. However, it is simply ridiculous for anyone to object to a system that prevents someone whom our national security authorities deemed to be unable to fly to be allowed to purchase firearms. Not even the NRA could object to prohibiting suspected terrorists from buying firearms.
@D “Not even the NRA could object to prohibiting suspected terrorists from buying firearms.”
But they do.
Pretty simple to understand. If you give blacks unlimited guns and tell them to go terrorize white people, the NRA will very quickly become sane and argue for complete governmental control over every single firearm…
It is very clear… The NRA is not for gun rights… It is for white people’s gun rights….
They can say it is not true all they want… Blah, blah, it’s not true, blah, blah. But no one listens to what they say, anyway, do they? We all watch what they do and what they do, is instill fear in creepy white people… to make them send in their contributions….
We need to start a CPRA (Cool People’s Rifle Association) and judging by the numbers of blue votes each election cycle, there are far more Cool People than National Assholes currently residing in America….
Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…”. It is “…not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
Justice Scalia
I doubt there is political will to pass any meaningful legislation. Americans don’t care. And they care even less about a minority group like gay people.
“Not even the NRA could object to prohibiting suspected terrorists from buying firearms.”
Pay attention to what the NRA’s objections are. The issue is not banning people on the list from buying guns but the mechanics of the list itself.
No one knows how or why people are put on the list.
There is no mechanism to find out if you are on the list.
Most importantly, there is no mechanism to prove that you shouldn’t be on the list & to be removed from it.
If you fix these issues such a ban would pass with nearly unanimous support in Congress & with the full backing of the NRA. (If you don’t believe me, call the NRA yourself, they will be happy to discuss it with you.
“The issue is not banning people on the list from buying guns but the mechanics of the list itself.”
I love this defense of allowing terrorists easy access to guns, which you see in various forms. Basically it boils down to…”Nothing works, so fuck it. Let terrorists have all the guns they want, otherwise…tyranny!”
What an ignorant graphic. No where is the right to operate a motor vehicle in the Bill of Rights.
“Nothing works, so fuck it.”
It would take only days to formulate a bill that included transparency & due process while still maintaining the intent of the list. It’s too bad that Democrats won’t cooperate with doing so. I would even bet that the NRA’s legal team has most of the work done already.
The “process” talk is code for their real worry: That right-wing anti-government nuts might be put on a no-weapons list.
What’s so odd is their compulsion to visit a liberal site to start arguments over it. I guess the guns make them brave.
We don’t regulate vehicles because the Bill of Rights lets us. We regulate them because they are potentially deadly machines, and we insist on people take responsibility for their actions.
What gun owners are fighting is accountability. Because freedom.
The question is why conservatives can’t understand that the right to bear arms and the right to form a militia are linked for a reason. Original intent indeed.
I’m not a conservative, and “original intent” is up for grabs on the 2nd amendment. Read this book and enlighten yourself. Or don’t. I don’t give a fuck.
I own one rifle. It’s been locked in a safe outside of Centreville since 2003, and I haven’t fired it since 1994. I’m not a gun nut nor am I a member of the NRA. I’m a guy who can read and understand English.
>Not true. All that needs to happen is that the USSC finally notices that there’s a comma in the 2nd amendment… you know… the way it was actually written.
Sorry, you’re full of shit LE. Much greater legal minds than yours or mine have debated this for decades. Hell, the presence and placement of the commas vs. the semicolon have been debated to death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Change the Constitution and you take the SCOTUS out of the picture. Hell, Congress can add notes to the Amendment that specifically state their intent. SCOTUS, no matter how right wing, gun nutty they might be, cannot make an “intent” argument if the intent is clearly spelled out in the Amendment.
No Constitutional right is without limits. Originalism was a SCOTUS fad that will likely fade now that the principal proponent no longer sits. Should Clinton win the election, there could be an outright majority of liberal justices in short order.
Back to gun safety. There are reasonable, constitutional solutions to gun regulation. Unfortunately, even reasonable attempts to limit military type weapons are characterized as attempt to take away ALL guns. I don’t know anyone proposing to take away guns.
The ultimate gun freedom is often found in the places least free (See, Yemen, Syria, Libya). No single law can make us safe. Failure to enact modest restrictions endangers us all.
If the second amendment written long ago were read and interrupted honestly, it would be seen as relevant today as the third amendment.
@L “Sorry, you’re full of shit LE.”
Au contraire. What I said was completely true. A simple reinterpretation of the 2nd amendment could render it useful to only those belonging to a well regulated militia.
The USSC does have the power to do that… and anything you might have to say about that would be safe to ignore.
Realistically the way to bring the Supreme Court into play is to pass a strong assault weapons ban based not on styling, but on capacity and rate of fire, just like machine guns and sawed-off shotguns. It would be challenged and likely upheld. That would begin to address the phenomenon of mass shootings.
It took a long and well-funded effort by the NRA to get the law to ignore “the well regulated militia” portion of the Second Amendment.
The ammosexuals claim that their rights to a gun are somehow God-given, reduces my claim to a peaceful existence just a privilege. If that.
No, LeBay, I won’t read the book because I don’t really give a fuck about the 2nd Amendment, or the fever dreams of people then or now who can’t stop pretending in their own minds that they’re the heroes of the revolution.
Without even reading it I can tell you that personal protection was never mentioned back then, because a gun was useless for that purpose at the time. You can read English, but I question your ability to understand it.
I”m completely inured to America’s love affair with “freedom.” My only solace is that when I get the terminal cancer diagnosis I can buy my own gun and start dispensing my own freedom projectiles.
There was a mass shooting in Wilmington last night in which five people were shot. Details aren’t available but I assume the gun was an illegally obtained handgun, or the shooter was a person prohibited from owning a gun, or both.
From where I sit it is hard to say how to stop this kind of gun violence. The details are rarely published, but it is important police work to learn the nature of the beef and work to shut down the root cause.
Gun control on handguns is more complicated than assault weapons. In the long run I hope technology is developed to detect a concealed handgun from a passing patrol car. If people had to run home to get their guns, maybe that would at least slow down street shootings.