• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tonight, the Senate votes on four gun control bills [update: everything failed]

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
I'm fine with the Murphy, Cornyn, and Grassley amendments. They all seem reasonable to varying degrees and could pass one day (say, if democrats retake the senate and house). I can't imagine the Feinstein one passing regardless of who controls congress.
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
PeakPointMatrix said:
The Dem's A and B sound like a good start. Add to the pile the Rep's B, and there's something at least.

To the both of them I ask, only 5 years? Should be permanent. I would never trust a "reformed" suspected terrorist unless evidence cleared their name without a doubt. Even former criminals that have committed certain crimes.
Click to expand...

Senator Ted Kennedy was on the list at one point.
 
H

hwalker84

Member
Gun guy here (Not just a person that owns one or two and never shoots. I shoot weekly and CC).

Zero issues with what's proposed. Though I would want due process in being able to remove yourself from a terrorist watch list. Reasonable belief would need a concrete definition for me.

There is no such thing as a gunshow loophole. Sorry folks there is no loophole in federal law that specifically exempts gun show transactions from any other laws normally applied to gun sales. Not one.

States that allow face to face purchases (only to people with residence in the same state) without submitting a background check aren't doing anything different at a gunshow than what they can do in the parking lot of a Target.

What can happen are fake id's. This isn't a gunshow loophole this is just flat out breaking the law.
 
S

Spoiled Milk

Banned
collige said:
This is "burn it all down" logic that people use to support voting for Trump.
Click to expand...
No it's not. It's refinment of policy I like. The ideal outcome is that people are banned from buying guns if they're on a watchlist but there is due process going on or off of it.
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
Kristoffer said:
No it's not. It's refinment of policy I like. The ideal outcome is that people are banned from buying guns if they're on a watchlist but there is due process going on or off of it.
Click to expand...

At that point it's just the standard judicial system, which bars criminals from buying guns.
 
S

sturgboski

Member
Fuck Republicans and the NRA. If the federal population agrees with this, vote yes, fuck the money the NRA PS in you pocket.

Please let Democrats take over it all this fall.
 
F

Freeza Under The Shower

Member
Calamari41 said:
I'm pro-gun and I support the last three. The first one is way too Orwellian. I could put you on a terror watch list tomorrow if I knew your address.
Click to expand...

That is not how intelligence services work, and none of that is "Orwellian". There is a long and complex legal course a case on a suspected individual has to take before ever even getting close to a very specific watchlist. We're talking about a list that may have a hundred individuals on it, tops. And there have to very heavy suspicions to put anyone on them.
I know that's not how it's presented these days (and obviously the Patriot Act shit doesn't help), but it is a legal structure that the state has to follow. You don't just get on a list for saying "Allahuh Akhbar" before going to work. Or even being in a white power militia that has no known incidents of violence. Sure, not a nice guy, but statistically unlikely to suddenly change that pattern.

More importantly, NOBODY IS ADDED to the already existing list. The Orlando shooter had already been on that list, and would have given law enforcement / justice department the legal means to intervene, if possible.

edit: as I understand it, and possible a bit biased towards the European way of doing these things. Obviously different countries use different legal means.

edit 2:

Wilsongt said:
The first two failed. On to the Republican bills.
Click to expand...

well, that's that then.
 
F

freethoughtbubble

Member
I'm all for stricter gun control, but Feinstein's bill seems blatantly unconstitutional since it appears to deny the exercise of a fundamental right (thanks Scalia :/) without due process of law. I like the judicial oversight baked into the GOP's proposal, but could leave the requirement that a suspect actually be investigated before the restriction kicks in.

A good compromise would be to lift the GOP's oversight procedure and marry it to the reasonable suspicion standard favored by the democrats. Unfortunately I expect no such compromise will be made and both measures will fail miserably.

The remaining proposals are great, common-sense measures that should have been in place already, damn it. Hopefully we get something this go around.

Wilsongt said:
Background check af gunshow failed. 44-56
Click to expand...

Welp.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
hwalker84 said:
Gun guy here (Not just a person that owns one or two and never shoots. I shoot weekly and CC).

Zero issues with what's proposed. Though I would want due process in being able to remove yourself from a terrorist watch list. Reasonable belief would need a concrete definition for me.

There is no such thing as a gunshow loophole. Sorry folks there is no loophole in federal law that specifically exempts gun show transactions from any other laws normally applied to gun sales. Not one.

States that allow face to face purchases (only to people with residence in the same state) without submitting a background check aren't doing anything different at a gunshow than what they can do in the parking lot of a Target.

What can happen are fake id's. This isn't a gunshow loophole this is just flat out breaking the law.
Click to expand...

Yes, technically the loophole is that unlicenced dealers are able to sell guns completely without regulation, which ends up often happening at gun shows but isn't explicitly mentioned in federal law.

It's a semantic detail that doesn't really alter the issue at all.
 
A

antonz

Member
Freeza Under The Shower said:
That is not how intelligence services work, and none of that is "Orwellian". There is a long and complex legal course a case on a suspected individual has to take before ever even getting close to a very specific watchlist. We're talking about a list that may have a hundred individuals on it, tops. And there have to very heavy suspicions to put anyone on them.
I know that's not how it's presented these days (and obviously the Patriot Act shit doesn't help), but it is a legal structure that the state has to follow. You don't just get on a list for saying "Allahuh Akhbar" before going to work. Or even being in a white power militia that has no known incidents of violence. Sure, not a nice guy, but statistically unlikely to suddenly change that pattern.

More importantly, NOBODY IS ADDED to the already existing list. The Orlando shooter had already been on that list, and would have given law enforcement / justice department the legal means to intervene, if possible.

edit: as I understand it, and possible a bit biased towards the European way of doing these things. Obviously different countries use different legal means.
Click to expand...

The terrorist Watch list in 2007 was already over 700,000 names with 20,000 people added a month. The ALCU reported that in 2009 the list had grown to over 1 million people based on growth rates. In America the standards for getting on lists is extremely low and in most cases you have no way to defend yourself. Which is why things like Republican Bill B is so important. Due Process is supposed to be guaranteed but we find more often than not they use the specter of terrorism etc. to deny the rights.
 
Link

Link

The Autumn Wind
Hellwarden said:
So I'm willing to bet the remaining two don't pass either.
Click to expand...
They won't. I don't know why anyone thought they would. The entire point of the filibuster was to show that even simple regulations would fail because of Republicans.
 
C

collige

Banned
Freeza Under The Shower said:
That is not how intelligence services work, and none of that is "Orwellian". There is a long and complex legal course a case on a suspected individual has to take before ever even getting close to a very specific watchlist. We're talking about a list that may have a hundred individuals on it, tops. And there have to very heavy suspicions to put anyone on them.
I know that's not how it's presented these days (and obviously the Patriot Act shit doesn't help), but it is a legal structure that the state has to follow. You don't just get on a list for saying "Allahuh Akhbar" before going to work. Or even being in a white power militia that has no known incidents of violence. Sure, not a nice guy, but statistically unlikely to suddenly change that pattern.

More importantly, NOBODY IS ADDED to the already existing list. The Orlando shooter had already been on that list, and would have given law enforcement / justice department the legal means to intervene, if possible.

edit: as I understand it, and possible a bit biased towards the European way of doing these things. Obviously different countries use different legal means.
Click to expand...

The number of names on the no fly list quadrupled over a couple of years during Obama's administration.
 
M

Maxim726X

Member
So was there anything else in these bills?

Because I find it hard to believe that they're going to want to defend these votes unless there was something else in these bills they could point to...
 
F

Freeza Under The Shower

Member
antonz said:
The terrorist Watch list in 2007 was already over 700,000 names with 20,000 people added a month. The ALCU reported that in 2009 the list had grown to over 1 million people based on growth rates.
Click to expand...

collige said:
The number of names on the no fly list quadrupled over a couple of years during Obama's administration.
Click to expand...

boy, is my face red. :(

But is that a domestic or global list? Because 1 million on 7.4 billion is different from 1 in 330.
 
A

antonz

Member
Freeza Under The Shower said:
boy, is my face red. :(

But is that a domestic or global list? Because 1 million on 7.4 billion is different from 1 in 330.
Click to expand...

These are the domestic lists. Though in some cases the list can have names that are common not even linked to a specific person. There have been infants and small children like 2-3 years old denied from being allowed to board a flight with their family because their name happens to be shared with someone who is on the No fly list for instance. The systems in place are so incredibly lazy and there is no oversight and protections in place for the people.
 
P

Piggus

Member
This congress has demonstrated repeatedly that they're completely incompetent. Don't like? Vote. In. The. Fucking. Midterms.

Effnine said:
Fucking morons. Nothing will help this country until our politicians get their heads out of their asses.
Click to expand...

It will help when lazy-ass young people bother to vote. One or more of these may have passed if dems didn't essentially hand over control of congress to the GOP.
 
G

GoldenEye 007

Member
Really crazy and disappointing. Welp, my thinking is that there is no way these would have survived the House anyway. Is that a fair thought?

GOP must be voted out at all levels. And I say this as someone who likes guns and just wants some reasonable reforms.
 
D

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
Was there any attempt to get rid of that law that forbids the Government from researching gun violence?

Least it's now official that Republicans and every single person who votes for them is 100% for more gun violence and mass shootings.
 
C

ChrisD

Member
I really wish I could say I'm surprised none of them passed, but that'd be lying... They were too reasonable.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Gun control dead in Senate until the Democrats manage to take it back.

Please be sure to vote this year and in all midterm elections, folks.
 
R

Raxus

Member
Only God or emperor Obama can force even the most watered down gun control into law.

VOTE IN MID TERMS EVERYONE!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Gun Interactive losing player trust. (The Texas Chain Saw Massacre)
9
805
BacklashWave534 replied
Bobby Kotick, former CEO of Activision, Interested in Buying Tik-Tok
2 3
143
10K
Gameplay Gods Bless replied
Phil Spencer interview - Says that their intent is for all Xbox games, including Call of Duty, to be available on Xbox Game Pass Day One
2 3
102
9K
Kenneth Haight replied
Trump endorses guns for teachers "to stop shootings"
2 3 4 5 6
287
28K
BANGS replied
A background check before voting? Kobach-led commission will consider proposal
2
1K
Mortemis replied
Top Bottom