Gentlemen, It's Time! Join or Re-join! But Be Counted!

[Emperor]

There is more to it than just that. Perhaps passing that bill as a stand alone was not going to happen. Ridiculous amendments being piled on comes to mind. These scum up there refuse to pass stand alone bills on anything, whether it's good for the country or not!

Now, I don't know for sure about this particular bill, but will find out. But a word to the wise, never believe anything at face value being reported in the media.

If I recall correctly, the "terror watch list" is the "no-fly list", which is a secret list where names are added and taken off only by the federal government. The problem that I heard voiced was that you could be on that list and never know it, until you go to legally buy a gun and your background check is rejected (and I suspect you would not be told why you were rejected). Would also be possible that those in control of government could arrange for their enemies or those who don't think like them (conservatives, 2nd Amendment fans, etc) to end up on that list (like what happened with IRS harassing Tea Parties under this administration).

As suspected:

On Thursday, December 3, the U.S. Senate took up H.R. 3762, the Restoring Americans’ Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act. Despite the seemingly innocuous title, the bill set up a dramatic showdown over Second Amendment rights.

The bill was brought under budget reconciliation, an expedited legislative procedure for a budget resolution to meet fiscal targets. Under this procedure, the bill required only 51 votes to pass the Senate and was limited to 20 hours of debate. It was also subject to a rule which prohibits non-budget related provisions from being added.

Anti-gun Democrats were nevertheless determined to exploit both the bill and recent tragedies to attach as many gun control amendments as possible. To proceed to debate on these out-of-order amendments, however, they had to reach a supermajority of 60 votes to suspend the rules. The pro-gun Senate you elected held the line. Every anti-gun amendment was defeated.

Long-time Second Amendment opponent Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) offered a far-reaching amendment that would have given the U.S. Attorney General what amounted to a discretionary veto on gun sales to anyone *appropriately suspected* of having some connection to *terrorism.* Anti-gun bureaucrats would have been empowered to deny Second Amendment rights based merely on their own *reasonable belief* concerning someone’s present or future intentions.

Gun control advocates have made clear, however, that they don’t trust anybody with a gun, and they have slandered pro-Second Amendment Americans as dangerous *rightwing extremists* and worse. Equally clear is that many supporters of this amendment have no stomach for effective measures to keep America safe from terrorists, chief among them ensuring that foreign nationals involved in or supportive of terrorist groups are kept out of America in the first place. Feinstein’s Amendment failed by a vote of 45-54.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) also dredged up his ill-fated ban on private firearm transfers between friends and many family members. That was defeated by a vote of 47-50 – receiving seven votes less than it got two years ago. Manchin’s background check bill has been a rallying cry for anti-gun activists since its historic defeat in 2013. Fortunately, that cry once again fell on deaf ears as reason prevailed over hyperbole and opportunism.

In the days leading to the vote, gun prohibitionists and their allies in the media had whipped themselves up to a veritable frenzy. The pressure they brought to bear on the Senate was intense. Nevertheless, cooler heads prevailed, backed by sound research and empirical evidence.

No doubt the defeated anti-gunners will be venting their displeasure over yet another round of clear defeats. Please make sure to let your Senators know in the days ahead how you felt about their votes. In particular, those who stood on the side of freedom deserve to hear a hearty thanks and well-done!

 

[Rainsdrops]

Are there clearly written definitions, that define a federally suspected terrorist?
Who maintains and creates the definitions. Should list updates be availible to the public?

Will the ownership of multiple "non sporting" firearms add you to the list.
Usage of multiple FBI bad words, in a blog add you to the list?
Downloading or read gun smithing / firearm manufacting add you to the list
Writing / speaking sentences the government considers anti patriotic?
This **** has the potential to be scary.
We really need lobby support on capital hill. I just wish, the information was transparent, and easily availible.

 

[Swampwood]

just renewed...united we stand or divided we will fall. We all know this was never a gun issue! Exploitation of whatever they can for taking away guns from law abiding citizens is their agenda.

jmo

 

[buttanic]

Ralph Peters might have the same opinion of this bunch.

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/12/sco...-to-semi-auto-and-magazine-ban/#axzz3thQ8Xrlj

 

[Emperor]

Ralph Peters might have the same opinion of this bunch.

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/12/sco...-to-semi-auto-and-magazine-ban/#axzz3thQ8Xrlj

It's sad that all this is a self fulfilling prophecy! The sticking point of the 2A is the "militia" phrase. I fear some time in the future, everyone will get their wish; they will see said militia's take to the streets.

 

[Whitebread]

It's sad that all this is a self fulfilling prophecy! The sticking point of the 2A is the "militia" phrase. I fear some time in the future, everyone will get their wish; they will see said militia's take to the streets.

You know its funny how often people misrepresent that militia part. I think you and I are on thr same page but many others are not.
Our founders carried deep rooted fear and suspensions of "standing armies" so in order to form a more perfect union they said in the second ammendment that we would have a citizens army, a militia. In other words you, me, and T'bob are in charge of insuring the safety and liberty of this great nation. And because we are responsible we are to be able to access the munitions required to do so. As the years have gone past we have moved away from this principal, and mostly because we are lazy, wusses who want someone to stand in that gap for us.

We have many variations of what our founders would call standing armies. Of coarse there are the branches of the military but we also have police forces in dang near every hill billy town in America. Plus the federal para-millitary division of the DOJ. This is not what the founders were talking about when they said militia.

I am sure people have read my post expressing my concern that LEOs have been intrusted as individuals with too much power. This is where my belief is rooted. The up right, up-standing citizens of this country were supposed to provide the security that these agnecies provide and because we became lazy and complacent we have given away the farm.

 

[Whitebread]

A little lagniappe for the peeps.

Anyone know the one "LEO type" agency that is constitutionally recongnised?