Harry Reid Prepares to Annihilate Second Amendment

Right Side News ^ | 03 January 201 | Right Side News

[arthurus]

Gun grabbers are not going to be able to get 60 votes to break a Senate filibuster of gun control. But, with the help of fake "pro-gun" Senate Democrats, they may be able to get 50.

So the question of whether Senate Democrats will need 50 votes or 60 votes will determine whether gun control -– and much of Obama's agenda -– will be slammed through and passed into law.

This brings us to the "nuclear option."

This is a trick which anti-gun Democrats intend to use the first day of the Senate session in order to obliterate the Senate rules and clear the way for 50-vote passage of gun control.

Your senator's vote on the "nuclear option" may be the most important gun-related vote he casts during the 113th Congress. It may be the difference between whether Obama can secure Senate passage of gun bans, magazine bans, gun show bans, and bans on private gun sales.

Anti-gun Democrats will try to tell you that the Senate is just following its precedents.

But that's a bald-faced lie. As Democrats made clear during the Bush administration when the Republicans were contemplating the "nuclear option," the nuclear option has been threatened, but the trigger has never been pulled.

Anti-gun Democrats will try to tell you that the "nuclear option" can only be invoked on the first day.

That's a lie.

[JCBreckenridge]

” the nuclear option has been threatened, but the trigger has never been pulled.”

Yes, it was already used to ram O-care through.

[apillar]

Indeed, this assumes a majority in the House votes for Feinstein’s proposal.

If anything passes it's not going to look remotely like Feinstein's proposal. (Fienstein's proposal wouldn't even likely pass constitutional muster with the courts...) They...might...be able to get the so called "gun show loophole" through (which would be essentially pointless and uneforcable see (1) below) and maybe limits on hi-cap magazines which would look like the 1994 ban with all existing ones being grandfathered in and manufacture banned after a certain date (also pointless see (2) below).

(1) Closing the gun show loophole would require anybody selling a gun to another individual to go through a licensed gun dealer and have a backgroud check done. Unless you are stupid enough to pay by check or give a dated receipt, there would be no way to tell if the transaction took place before or after the requirement went into place, making it essentially on the honor system, and almost impossible to enforce.

(2) Hi-Cap Magazines are as plentiful as ball point pens and will always be easy to obtain, ban on manufacture or not. The last time they tried to ban them the price had barely budged at the end of the ten year ban and most gun stores had tables full of them.

[nomobs]

You mean the house of rubberstamp

[longtermmemmory]

3d printing?

This seems an impossible task. The only way the communists could control these by outlawing them completly so their mere existence is a crime.

What we need to do is pick a hollyweird A lister and take them out by refusing to buy or support any show, tv program, product, etc that has their appearance. make them ecconomically shunned.

[ArrogantBustard]

Didn’t the NRA back Ried in 2010?

No, after some apparent dithering on the topic, it did not.

It did, however, support Manchin in a thoroughly disgusting, boot licking manner ... both in 2010 and 2012.

We're about to test the mettle of the oh-so-wonderful, NRA A+ rated and endorsed Senaturd Manchin.

[familyop]

"Unfortunately, the Senate is in the hands of the anti-constitution Harry Reid, and the House is in the hands of the tearful Boehner."

I disagree with the likes of Boehner on the big government spending, too. Celebrities are big on TV, aren't they. But they aren't all-powerful emperors, as seen on too many wanna-be conservative boards. And we should all know by now that the political/regulator constituents who keep socialist politicians (re. most politicians: lawyers) in office are quite dependent on big government for their fat, bipartisan paychecks.

All Republican members of the House can vote, and each and every one of them can vote against any gun control bill. So can some of the Democrats (e.g., some of the southern ones). The bills will be posted here, as will every name and vote.

We're not retarded, are we? I don't think so. We've only been lazy until now, because most of us (both political parties) are lounging and gorging on fat incomes from federal, state and local government (for now). The bills will appear at the following site, when they are introduced. Hopefully, each posting of bills/status will be separate and not rolled into one post to make way for the usual cluck-fest.

Browse Bills & Resolutions 113th Congress (2013-2014)

[familyop]

http://gunowners.org/a01022013.htm

http://gunowners.org/

[Red Steel]

Boehner, you said this:

Boehner - Filibuster rule change bills 'dead on arrival' Washington Times ^
| 11-29 Posted on Thursday, November 29, 2012 10:03:06 PM by Arthurio

Find your spine.

[allmendream]

Well so long as it is a tax not a fine or penalty ......

[driftdiver]

The NRA didn’t “endorse” Reid but they did feature him in their monthly magazine and Wayne said great things about him.

[2nd amendment mama]

But...but...but....the NRA endorsed him.......duh!

[popdonnelly]

You might think about where you would hide your guns. Your defense is the Second Amendment.

[TNoldman]

Was Sandy Hook related to MF-Ultra???

[TheBigJ]

Let them vote. If it’s passed those who voted yay make the list for the free after party.

[OneWingedShark]

Nope, a treaty would only require the assent of 2/3rds of senators present.