Democratic senator wages filibuster to push vote on gun control measures

[Teh One Who Knocks]

FOX News and The Associated Press


http://i.imgur.com/NuJNUaV.jpg

A Democratic senator ended a nearly 15-hour-long filibuster on the Senate floor early Thursday, part of an effort to force a vote on gun control legislation following Sunday's terror attack in Orlando.

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., yielded the floor at 2:11 a.m., 14 hours and 50 minutes after he began speaking. Murphy kept up his filibuster to a mostly empty chamber, save for 38 Democratic senators who joined him and made their own speeches throughout the day. Two Republican senators, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, also made remarks.

Democrats were seeking a vote on two amendments to an underlying spending bill. One, proposed by Murphy, would expand background checks. The other, proposed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., would let the government bar sales of guns and explosives to people it suspects of being terrorists.

Republicans argue that Feinstein's bill denies due process to people who may be on the terror list erroneously and are trying to exercise their constitutional right to gun ownership.

Near the end of the filibuster, Murphy said that Senate leaders had promised "a path forward" for floor votes on the legislation, but did not elaborate further.

As he began to speak Wednesday morning, Murphy said he would remain on the Senate floor "until we get some signal, some sign that we can come together," and evoked the Newtown school shooting in his state in 2012.

"For those of us that represent Connecticut, the failure of this body to do anything, anything at all in the face of that continued slaughter isn't just painful to us, it's unconscionable," Murphy said.

Separately Wednesday, the National Rifle Association reiterated its support for a bill from Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, that would let the government delay firearms sales to suspected terrorists for up to 72 hours. Prosecutors would have to persuade a judge to block the transaction permanently, a bar Democrats and gun control activists say is too high.

The Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen, was added to a government watch list of individuals known or suspected of being involved in terrorist activities in 2013, when he was investigated for inflammatory statements to co-workers. But he was pulled from that database when that investigation was closed 10 months later.

Efforts to compromise between the Cornyn and Feinstein bills collapsed within hours of surfacing in the Senate Wednesday, underscoring the extreme difficulty of resolving the divisive issue five months to the election.

Meanwhile, Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control group backed by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, said it was working on a compromise with Toomey.

By the end of the day Wednesday, Toomey, who is facing a tough re-election race this fall, had introduced legislation that would direct the attorney general to create a new list of suspected terrorists who could be barred from buying weapons. But Democrats immediately rejected that idea, saying it would create too much of a backlog.

[redred]

don't touch the guns

[FBD]

enough of this bullshit of attaching garbage to a bill that has nothing whatsoever to do with anything else in the bill

[DemonGeminiX]

Connecticut needs to vote some assholes out.

[RBP]

I may get shot for saying this, but those 2 ideas seem pretty reasonable to me.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

I may get shot for saying this, but those 2 ideas seem pretty reasonable to me.

My only question on one of the issues is, expand background checks how exactly. Clear that up and then let's take a look at it. As far as being on the No-Fly List or a terrorist watchlist, then yes, you should absolutely be barred from purchasing a firearm. If it truly is a clerical error, the extra few days to clear it up shouldn't be that big a deal for some one. Rarely does someone need a gun RIGHT FUCKING NOW other than maybe someone afraid for their life from an abusive relationship or something like that.

[FBD]

Connecticut needs to vote some assholes out.
aaahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaa

yyyyyyyeah.....except that there's so much voter and electoral fraud here that voting in CT really does not make one shit's worth of difference, the secretary of state in conjunction with diebold and the judicial system are well captured and make sure that only the correct votes are counted.


I may get shot for saying this, but those 2 ideas seem pretty reasonable to me.

the shooter was already on an FBI watch list, wtf else do you want? like our border situation, if the laws on the books were enforced then we wouldnt be facing these issues.

[fricnjay]

Its funny to me that once again a terrorist does terrorist things and there is a call for more civilian gun control when in fact at least with this case the FBI dropped the ball on this guy. That's the FBI's fault and civilians are going to be punished? What kinda sense does that make, oh yea thats what we call bureaucracy. :roll:

[RBP]

My only question on one of the issues is, expand background checks how exactly. Clear that up and then let's take a look at it. As far as being on the No-Fly List or a terrorist watchlist, then yes, you should absolutely be barred from purchasing a firearm. If it truly is a clerical error, the extra few days to clear it up shouldn't be that big a deal for some one. Rarely does someone need a gun RIGHT FUCKING NOW other than maybe someone afraid for their life from an abusive relationship or something like that.

:agreed:

I am particularly interested in the mental health provisions. In past proposals, they were far too vague and broad.

[RBP]

the shooter was already on an FBI watch list, wtf else do you want? like our border situation, if the laws on the books were enforced then we wouldnt be facing these issues.

Previously, not at the time of the purchase, was what I read this morning. He was on a list for 10 months then removed when the investigation was closed.

[fricnjay]

:agreed:

I am particularly interested in the mental health provisions. In past proposals, they were far too vague and broad.

Throughout the years the U.S. has had great mental health social programs but have systematically been defunded or shut down. Maybe its time to finally have that discussion.

[RBP]

Its funny to me that once again a terrorist does terrorist things and there is a call for more civilian gun control when in fact at least with this case the FBI dropped the ball on this guy. That's the FBI's fault and civilians are going to be punished? What kinda sense does that make, oh yea thats what we call bureaucracy. :roll:

I am not at all convinced this impacts terrorism one iota. They just move to different weapons. An effective suicide vest would have killed a lot more then 49 in a packed club.

[RBP]

Throughout the years the U.S. has had great mental health social programs but have systematically been defunded or shut down. Maybe its time to finally have that discussion.

It is also part of the prison problem. Mental health has been effectively criminalized. The largest inpatient mental health facility in Illinois is the Cook County Jail in Chicago.

That is also the case in about 1/2 of all states if I remember correctly.

[DemonGeminiX]

I'm not against expanded background checks. I have no problem with background checks at gun shows, but I can't see how you would accomplish that in a simple manner when considering a private sale.

As for the denial for people on a watch list... I'm kind of torn. On the one hand, it would violate due process, and those watch lists could be misused for political means. Look at the IRS scandal as an example of that kind of exploitation. On the other hand, yeah, we need to keep these guys from getting weapons, period. But where does it stop? Do we trust that the idiots up on the Hill can keep themselves in check?

Personally, I think the FBI dropped the ball on this guy, and I'm blaming Obama for that. He gutted our intelligence capabilities and the tools that we had at our disposal that actually worked, and he neutered law enforcement with his bullshit PC agenda. I'm not for violating people's right to exercise their religion, but we have to be realistic about this: Christians, Jews, Atheists, et al. aren't killing people in this country in the name of their religion.

[RBP]

I'm not against expanded background checks. I have no problem with background checks at gun shows, but I can't see how you would accomplish that in a simple manner when considering a private sale.

As for the denial for people on a watch list... I'm kind of torn. On the one hand, it would violate due process, and those watch lists could be misused for political means. Look at the IRS scandal as an example of that kind of exploitation. On the other hand, yeah, we need to keep these guys from getting weapons, period. But where does it stop? Do we trust that the idiots up on the Hill can keep themselves in check?

Personally, I think the FBI dropped the ball on this guy, and I'm blaming Obama for that. He gutted our intelligence capabilities and the tools that we had at our disposal that actually worked, and he neutered law enforcement with his bullshit PC agenda. I'm not for violating people's right to exercise their religion, but we have to be realistic about this: Christians, Jews, Atheists, et al. aren't killing people in this country in the name of their religion.

The watch list seems simple to me. The FBI has the right to block a gun sale for security reasons, and the denied party can appeal to a court to have it overturned.

[DemonGeminiX]

aaahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaa

yyyyyyyeah.....except that there's so much voter and electoral fraud here that voting in CT really does not make one shit's worth of difference, the secretary of state in conjunction with diebold and the judicial system are well captured and make sure that only the correct votes are counted.

I really don't believe that you're dealing with voter fraud. I think there's a simpler explanation: There's more liberal Democrats in your state that originally came from New York, and they brought their liberal horseshit ideals and expectations with them to your polls, and subsequently, to your state laws and regulations. Unless your conservative population stands up and votes, then their conservative voices will never be heard.

[FBD]

Its funny to me that once again a terrorist does terrorist things and there is a call for more civilian gun control when in fact at least with this case the FBI dropped the ball on this guy. That's the FBI's fault and civilians are going to be punished? What kinda sense does that make, oh yea thats what we call bureaucracy. :roll:
If the FBI "dropped the ball," its only because the CIA made sure they were running around in the dark chasing their tails, as usual.


Previously, not at the time of the purchase, was what I read this morning. He was on a list for 10 months then removed when the investigation was closed.

yep, and I'd put my money on that having changed somewhere around....oh, June 11th

[FBD]

I really don't believe that you're dealing with voter fraud. I think there's a simpler explanation: There's more liberal Democrats in your state that originally came from New York, and they brought their liberal horseshit ideals and expectations with them to your polls, and subsequently, to your state laws and regulations. Unless your conservative population stands up and votes, then their conservative voices will never be heard.

:lol: tell that to bridgeport when they found bags of over 15,000 votes last time the governor election was close enough that normal electoral fraud wasnt going to cover it. Vote was won with less than 2000 votes.

If diebold cant cover it, more extreme measures are taken.

Conservatives were out in full force, there's plenty enough of them here, but their votes are silenced.

[DemonGeminiX]

If that's true, then that's fucked up. That's grounds for an uprising.

[fricnjay]

http://i.imgur.com/0SsyRHq.jpg

:lol:

[FBD]

If that's true, then that's fucked up. That's grounds for an uprising.

ya wonder why I get so ornery about this shit? I've been witnessing it a long ass time, bro. CT doesnt have the most fucked up budget in the country for nothin', we dont have the worst financial position aside from puerto rico for nothin either.

[DemonGeminiX]

The watch list seems simple to me. The FBI has the right to block a gun sale for security reasons, and the denied party can appeal to a court to have it overturned.

Yeah, but they're being deprived of liberty without due process. They haven't been arrested, no charges have been formally brought against them, and they haven't faced a trial, let alone have been convicted of any crime. All the Feds have is a suspicion and that just doesn't cut the mustard when the 5th amendment is considered.

Don't get me wrong, my heart tells me that we should be more like Israel for security reasons, but our Constitution doesn't make it so simple.

[FBD]

Yeah, but they're being deprived of liberty without due process. They haven't been arrested, no charges have been formally brought against them, and they haven't faced a trial, let alone have been convicted of any crime. All the Feds have is a suspicion and that just doesn't cut the mustard when the 5th amendment is considered.

Don't get me wrong, my heart tells me that we should be more like Israel for security reasons, but our Constitution doesn't make it so simple.

For some craaaaaazy reason, Israel is among the few countries that deal with this shit properly.

[DemonGeminiX]

For some craaaaaazy reason, Israel is among the few countries that deal with this shit properly.

When you're surrounded by enemies on all sides, you'll learn to be vigilant and you'll develop and implement methods to protect yourself from them too.

[FBD]

When you're surrounded by enemies on all sides, you'll learn to be vigilant and you'll develop and implement methods to protect yourself from them too.

When you convince an international body to confiscate holy lands and surrounding areas of your enemies that tossed your asses out a millenium ago, and then you keep bulldozing their houses and your special forces are shooting 5 year olds off the roofs, and you have the largest military on the planet operating as your attack dog lackey.....you might just have some fuckers wanting to kill you.


It was rhetorical, DGX...Israel takes a serious approach to it because its leaders arent in the process of destroying their country, they arent bought off by foreign international powers and paid to subvert their nation's laws.

[DemonGeminiX]

[-(

You didn't use the rhetorical smiley.

[FBD]

I was all shit, we got a rhetorical smiley? :lol:

[RBP]

Yeah, but they're being deprived of liberty without due process. They haven't been arrested, no charges have been formally brought against them, and they haven't faced a trial, let alone have been convicted of any crime. All the Feds have is a suspicion and that just doesn't cut the mustard when the 5th amendment is considered.

Don't get me wrong, my heart tells me that we should be more like Israel for security reasons, but our Constitution doesn't make it so simple.

Meh, the due process argument rings a little hollow in the post 9-11 world. You're saying we can indefinitely detain terror suspects with no trial, but we can't deny them a weapon? Really?

[DemonGeminiX]

Meh, the due process argument rings a little hollow in the post 9-11 world. You're saying we can indefinitely detain terror suspects with no trial, but we can't deny them a weapon? Really?

So what? Throw away the Constitution? That's where due process comes from. That's the foundation of our nation. Either you take it as a whole or you reject it as a whole. Despite Obama's violations, you can't just pick and choose to follow only the parts you want upheld. And if you reject it as a whole, well, then we're all screwed.

Detained terror suspects kept in GBay are foreign enemy combatants. It's a military thing. In my opinion, if you're not a U.S. citizen, then the Constitution doesn't apply to you. I don't care what the idiots in the Supreme Court say. So fuck those terrorists, let them rot down in Guantanamo. What we're talking about here is American citizens. They're protected under the Constitution. Due process applies. I would concede that they could be considered enemy combatants, but you have to prove first that they fall under that designation. Prove that they're traitors. From what I've seen, they kind of make it easy. After you do that, fine, strip them of their citizenship and ship their sorry asses to Guantanamo and torture the fuck out of them.

Keep in mind, I'm playing the Devil's advocate here. I don't want those assholes to have guns either, but I want to have this debate.

[RBP]

So what? Throw away the Constitution? That's where due process comes from. That's the foundation of our nation. Either you take it as a whole or you reject it as a whole. Despite Obama's violations, you can't just pick and choose to follow only the parts you want upheld. And if you reject it as a whole, well, then we're all screwed.

Detained terror suspects kept in GBay are foreign enemy combatants. It's a military thing. In my opinion, if you're not a U.S. citizen, then the Constitution doesn't apply to you. I don't care what the idiots in the Supreme Court say. So fuck those terrorists, let them rot down in Guantanamo. What we're talking about here is American citizens. They're protected under the Constitution. Due process applies. I would concede that they could be considered enemy combatants, but you have to prove first that they fall under that designation. Prove that they're traitors. From what I've seen, they kind of make it easy. After you do that, fine, strip them of their citizenship and ship their sorry asses to Guantanamo and torture the fuck out of them.

Keep in mind, I'm playing the Devil's advocate here. I don't want those assholes to have guns either, but I want to have this debate.

Then you must have been irate about Yaser Esam Hamdi and Jose Padilla, both US Citizens, both on indefinite detention on US soil, with no charges or trial. Since resolved, mind you, but lawful.

[DemonGeminiX]

I had to look this up, so obviously not. :lol:

Hamdi's a really weird case. He was a born citizen raised abroad in Saudi Arabia. He barely ever spent any time here at all. He trained with the Taliban and was captured during a battle in Afghanistan against our forces. He might as well have been a foreign enemy combatant, which is what the government actually considered him before the SC struck them down. And the only reason they struck it down was because he didn't receive due process to determine if he was an enemy combatant. It seems like a circle. Anyway, his charges were dropped after he agreed to renounce his citizenship and agreed to travel restrictions, which would technically make him a foreign enemy combatant if he would ever be captured again. So technically, if that happens then we'll be back where we started. The soldiers better just kill him the next time around and save everybody the time and trouble. Anyway, the case was all about the separation of powers. Bush was a bad boy. He tried to designate an American citizen as an enemy combatant when that's the court's job.

The same thing with Padilla, only Padilla was caught on US soil trying to blow shit up with a dirty bomb. Or at the very least, making up the plans to do it. Given that info, I'm not really miffed that he was detained, because fuck him, but I admit that, constitutionally-speaking, it was a bad thing to do.

[RBP]

My point was that there can be middle grounds. I don't hear anyone arguing that fully automatic weapons or sawed off shotguns should be legal again and that's been like 80 years.

And it you think about why those two weapon classes were banned, I believe it was because they were highly lethal and the weapon of choice of organized criminals. That sounds familiar... I think I just talked myself into supporting a common sense assault weapons ban; it the same argument as the original firearms act.

[redred]

so what about the Orlando shooter , american born was on a terror list at some stage, but this seems to be because of threats made to others ( if any muslim said the word bomb in the wrong way after 9/11 would they end up on a list ? ) but seems to have been taken off because of lack of evidence , would he still be able to get a gun under the 2nd ?

if he's not on a list he's a free american like you guys ( apart from FBD he's on lots of lists :lol:)

[Pony]

My point was that there can be middle grounds. I don't hear anyone arguing that fully automatic weapons or sawed off shotguns should be legal again and that's been like 80 years.



Well half the issue is many people believe fully automatic weapons are legal and easy to obtain. With the media calling semi-auto rifles "assault" weapons just because of their appearance and state representatives spreading misinformation like "The AR 15 can fire 700 rounds per minute" it's no wonder they are pushing hard for a ban.

I was reading an article and at least 70% of the liberal comments were under the assumption that the AR 15 is a fully automatic weapon that anyone can walk into walmart and buy.