A Senate in the Gun Lobby?????s Grip

[_Kevin Graham]

Honest question:Would background checks have prevented the Sandy Hook massacre or Gabrielle Giffords assassination attempt?

No, and that is beside the point and precisely the kind of mental gymnastics that pisses me off from the Right. It is as if you're being intentionally obtuse on the subject.

This is so simple my eight year old can understand it.

This legislation would make it more difficult for criminals and the mentally ill to obtain guns legally.

This is an indisputable fact.

As an indisputable fact, it is your job to explain why this is somehow a bad thing. Can you do it without all the sidetrack rhetoric? It is a simple question. No one ever said it would have prevented any of the recent tragedies. But it most likely will prevent some future ones. So we're talking about legislation likely to save lives, which people like you consider secondary to the considerations of some conspiracy theorizing, Gun tottin' rednecks who are worried about slippery slope legislation and the absurd prospect of the government "coming after our guns."

The usual talking points about how this will somehow deny law abiding citizens the right to bear arms, simply don't hold water.

The only reason the NRA hates this legislation is because their corporate sponsors ultimately do not give a damn whether or not the mentally ill or criminals purchase weapons from them. To them it is all about the money and always has been, and naturally a criminal's money is just as good as a law abiding citizen's money.

That's it. It is as simple as that. And politicians from both sides are proving exactly why the #1 problem with our system is the money. Unless we get money out of politics, we're going to be headed towards a strict Plutocracy.

[_subgenius]

Some peoples lives are saved by the right to bear arms. It's hard to get them to vote to put themselves in a defenseless state....

The bill in question isn’t about the right for law-abiding, mentally stable people to bear arms. The bill is about whether people with criminal records or dangerous psychiatric disorders should be able to purchase weapons through legal channels.

Making it a harder for criminals to purchase weapons does absolutely nothing to mitigate the right of law-abiding systems to own a gun. Why do you want it to be easy for criminals and the mentally unstable to obtain weapons?

have not most stats concluded that buying a gun illegally is cheaper and easier than buying them legal? and that criminals already do not bother with the latter?
In other words, the vast majority of guns used in crime and killing sprees are acquired illegally in the first place.

criminals that sell illegal guns from the trunk of their car have never bothered with background checks...they probably check to see if the "customer" has a hidden microphone and leave it at that.

[_subgenius]

...(snip)...This legislation would make it more difficult for criminals and the mentally ill to obtain guns legally.
...

has there suddenly been an increase in criminals and mentally ill people obtaining guns legally? Is there some loophole that is being exploited and requires legislative efforts in order to bring peace and safety to our communities?
and more importantly has this increases in "obtaining legally" been the cause of increased crime and tragedy?

should not the legislation be focused on making it more difficult for anyone to obtain a gun illegally?

talk about mental gymnastics

[_Kevin Graham]

have not most stats concluded that buying a gun illegally is cheaper and easier than buying them legal? and that criminals already do not bother with the latter?
In other words, the vast majority of guns used in crime and killing sprees are acquired illegally in the first place.

criminals that sell illegal guns from the trunk of their car have never bothered with background checks...they probably check to see if the "customer" has a hidden microphone and leave it at that.

Exhibit A. Yet another intellectually dishonest piece of rhetroic that willfully neglects the facts of the matter and the true nature of the issue as well as the proposed legislation. The typical, "they're going to get guns illegally anyway" argument, "therefore let's fight tooth and nail" to see this modest step towards progress is avoided. I mean if the law isn't going to do anything productive as you insist, then why fight so passionately against it? The only local reason is the money driving it by the NRA. That's it. You're one of their puppets and nothing more.

No one said this legislation would solve the gun problem. No one ever said anything of the kind. In fact, all I have ever heard from Obama and its supporters is that it is a minimal measure but a step in the right direction by at least making it more difficult for criminals and the mentally ill to obtain guns.

The fact is there are plenty of gun related tragedies used with legally obtained guns. Not everyone deciding to commit a crime, outside of those living in the hood, has the inside track on black market arms. The mentally ill kid who shot up the school recently used his Mom's guns, purchased legally. Had she not had guns stocked in her closet, are we to really believe this kid would have called up the nearest underground arms dealer? I don't know her background, but if she had a criminal background and a history of mental illness, this kid wouldn't have had to means to kill so many people in such a short time. But even if her background was fine, the fact is there will be future incidents where legally obtain guns are used to kill innocent people. What is so intrusive or oppressive with a simple background check? If you're clean, you shouldn't have to worry about it.

Idiots like Erick Erickson are opining that the government will consider Christianity a mental disease and therefore this legislation will eventually serve to deny all Christians the right to bear arms. I mean these are the people running the Right Wing media right now. And now FOX is saying a gun registry is akin to death panels!

[_Kevin Graham]

has there suddenly been an increase in criminals and mentally ill people obtaining guns legally? Is there some loophole that is being exploited and requires legislative efforts in order to bring peace and safety to our communities?
and more importantly has this increases in "obtaining legally" been the cause of increased crime and tragedy?
should not the legislation be focused on making it more difficult for anyone to obtain a gun illegally?
talk about mental gymnastics

Yes your line of questions prove exactly who is engaging in mental gymnastics. You keep asking dumb questions pulled from the conveyor belt of Right Wing media talking points instead of answering any of the questions I have asked, based in indisputable facts.

Again.

Do you not agree that this legislation would make it more difficult for criminals and the mentally ill to obtain guns? Yes or no?

If you agree to this, then please explain why this is a bad thing.

The fact is anyone can buy a gun legally. Do experienced life-long criminals buy guns illegally? Yes, probably more than they do legally. That's irrelevant because there could be an infinite number of possible scenarios where a criminal intent on committing a "crime of passion" or an "impulse crime," is in need of a weapon immediately and the only way he can obtain one is by legally purchasing it. You may say this law would only delay the inevitable (the crime) but you don't know that. It probably would only delay it in most cases, maybe even 99.9% of them. But over the next ten years, even that .1% could result in saving a dozen, perhaps even a hundred lives.

This is an indisputable fact. And the fact that you are so against it proves the hypocrisy when you wail and moan about how precious life concerning aborted babies, Americans killed by terrorists justifying an economy-crippling war, etc etc. In reality, you're not interested in doing ANYTHING that could feasibly reduce violent crime even by a fraction. Because for you, what's more important is that you fight tooth and nail against the "leftists" and blame Obama for anything that can be spun as bad, while refusing to credit him with anything progress he has made. You're an NRA puppet. Congratulations.

[_ajax18]

Cinepro I was talking about this as reported on Mark Levine last night.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/17/politics/ ... index.html

The final vote was 54 in favor to 46 opposed with four Republicans joining most Democrats in supporting the compromise. With the outcome obvious, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, cast a "no" vote to secure the ability to bring the measure up again.

[_cinepro]

Honest question:Would background checks have prevented the Sandy Hook massacre or Gabrielle Giffords assassination attempt?

No, and that is beside the point and precisely the kind of mental gymnastics that pisses me off from the Right. It is as if you're being intentionally obtuse on the subject.

This is what Gabby Giffords says in an op-ed today:

On Wednesday, a minority of senators gave into fear and blocked common-sense legislation that would have made it harder for criminals and people with dangerous mental illnesses to get hold of deadly firearms — a bill that could prevent future tragedies like those in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., Blacksburg, Va., and too many communities to count.

Some of the senators who voted against the background-check amendments have met with grieving parents whose children were murdered at Sandy Hook, in Newtown. Some of the senators who voted no have also looked into my eyes as I talked about my experience being shot in the head at point-blank range in suburban Tucson two years ago, and expressed sympathy for the 18 other people shot besides me, 6 of whom died. These senators have heard from their constituents — who polls show overwhelmingly favored expanding background checks. And still these senators decided to do nothing. Shame on them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/18/opini ... .html?_r=0

If this legislation wouldn't have prevented those tragedies in the past, then why would someone assume it would work to prevent them in the future?

[_Bond James Bond]

Some peoples lives are saved by the right to bear arms. It's hard to get them to vote to put themselves in a defenseless state. Legislation cannot protect you against criminals. It only makes you vulnerable to them. It's not like there aren't a lot of gun laws already. New gun laws serve only to make politicians appear to be doing something for the public when more laws really don't help, especially when we only selectively enforce the laws we already have.

Your own Harry Reid voted against this bill Kevin. Yes there were disgraceful Republicans who voted for this bill, but the truth is that the bill would never have been voted down if every democrat had voted for it. Radical liberalism is not the majority in this country that many think it is. For many women, a gun is a great equalizer, so you don't get the gender gap that you get for issues like welfare. For inner city people, I'm sure defending yourself is more of a day to day reality than it is for me. I can't see them being very happy with the disarming of law biding citizens and leaving them to defend themselves from criminals with knives in a gunfight. Ultimately more regulations only serve to increase the cost to the point where people will not be able to afford to defend themselves legally.

It wasn't a vote to take guns away. The most important amendment would have expanded background checks, a system already in place, to unregulated online and person-to-person sales. That's it.

[_Bond James Bond]

Listening to Obama simply made me sick, no different than watching Anti-mormon "Christian" "love" videos, especially the Jesus Christ/Joseph Smith one.

Almost every word out of his mouth he was utterly LYING about those who believe in freedom, including the freedom to protect life, even with guns.

Even worse still is the LIE that the "bill" was going to "help" in almost ANY way actually stop recent mass shootings. The vast majority of the Bible went to NOTHING to stop actual gun shooting especially mass shootings, and further, the small amount such as the mental health aspects of the bill was just that, "small". That's the reason the bill fell, because it was just EVIL and STUPID.

And THANK GOD for actual FREEDOM, to Lobby FOR OUR FREEDOMS!!!!
As usual, liberals the Fascists they are want to take away freedom, such as the "gun lobby".
They call good evil and evil good as usual, placing "blame" where the blame doesn't belong, be it guns or pro-gunners.

Let's get back to reality. A tiny milquetoast expansion of the already in place background check system was what was beaten by a vote of 58-42. Yes 42 is greater than 58 in the Senate.

[_Bond James Bond]

A question. If you've got nothing to hide then why don't you want to do background checks on all gun owners?