Thursday, March 14, 2013

Report from GOA

Here’s where we are on Obama's gun control proposals:
Today, the Nut-Left Democrats on the Senate Judiciary voted to report the Feinstein gun ban – which could ban between 50% and 80% of guns and magazines in circulation today. It may not even get a majority in the Senate – much less the 60 votes needed to pass. And it is being pushed primarily to allow anti-gun Democrats from pro-gun states to pretend to be pro-gun.
Tuesday, the Judiciary Committee passed, by a 10-to-8 vote, the universal gun registry bill. Chief sponsor Chuck Schumer has been unable to achieve Republican support from anyone other than the anti-gun Illinois Republican Mark Kirk. Therefore, unless another Republican sells out at the last minute, we believe we can successfully filibuster this bill in the full Senate.
Tuesday, by a vote of 14-to-4, the Judiciary Committee alo reported a Boxer bill that would increase, by $10 million, the funding for an existing school safety program. The money could be used for armed guards, as the NRA proposes, or it could be used for an anti-gun study. It is therefore neither inherently “pro-gun” nor “anti-gun.” We have said we would oppose proceeding to Boxer if it is a vehicle for votes on other anti-gun measures – but that we would not object to its passage, without amendment, by “unanimous consent.”
This brings us to the central battlefield: Last week, the committee reported, by a vote of 11-to-7, the Veterans Gun Ban, S. 54. The lone GOP vote in favor came from Chuck Grassley, who indicated he would oppose the bill on the Senate floor unless it was improved from the committee-reported version.
As we see it, the chief strategic objective is now to keep gun control votes from coming to the Senate floor by opposing the “motion to proceed” to any bill which is going to be used as a vehicle for gun votes.
That would certainly mean that senators should oppose moving to proceed to universal gun registries or the Veterans Gun Ban. But it also means that we oppose moving to proceed to so-called non-controversial bills, such as Boxer, if those bills are being brought up as a vehicle for anti-gun amendments.

1 comment:

xtron said...

wait...veterans are part of the founding fathers "irregular militia"
what the founders saw as the "regular militia" would be called the reserves and the national guard...and anyone who was subject to being called into service by act of congress was considered "irregular militia" this today would include all males who are registered for the draft, and, because they can be recalled to active service, all veterans, up to the age of 62.

BTW...did you know tour local sheriff can form a militia without any involvement of the state or federal .gov?? they use to be called posses. and they are formed to carry out the local laws, as needed by the sheriff...where does your sheriff stand on the 2A? which side might his posse be formed to support, owners rights, or confiscation??