Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Question for gun lovers and anti-gunners both

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
reddouglasfir Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 05:54 PM
Original message
Question for gun lovers and anti-gunners both
Would you support merging the lawsuit preemption bill ( S 659?) and the Assault gun ban renewal ( s 1034) together if the Senate compromises next week?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
coltman Donating Member (342 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
1. merging
No
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Township75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. HELL NO! Pro gunners have nothing to lose, so why give up anything?
The preemption bill may very likely get to 60 senators for the fillibuster proofing...and the AWB will die regardless. Conceding the renewal of the AWB will likely only be giving up something we don't need to give up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reddouglasfir Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. You pro gunners will never get lawsuit preemption when Kerry/Edwards gets
in so I suggest you compromise and get it now.

What is wrong with passing both? Both sides are pleased and get something they want.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Township75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. We will get preemption because the vote will be before the election...
so it won't matter if either get into the White House.

Furthermore, don't be too sure they wouldn't get out of the way of the preemption bill during an election year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #4
29. speak for yourself...
the AW ban is an abomination. Thanks, but no thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Withergyld Donating Member (685 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
34. Your assuming they will get elected. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. Not only no...
hell no.

S. 659 protects individuals and businesses engaged in a lawful activity.

S. 1034 would make permanent a failed piece of legislation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alwynsw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. Nope, never, no, nay, nein!
Both sides don't get something they want. The anti's get a win and the RKBA proponents get another screwing in the form of continued restrictions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Five answers????
:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alwynsw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
36. Were I more "worldly" in my language skills, there would've been more
but I wimped out and gave up early
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. Better 5 answers in five words than...
No answer in 5 paragraphs. Both my Senators are good at the "Universal" letter to be sent to those on both sides of an issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alwynsw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. Does that piss your off as badly as it does me?
I always get that "wasted time" rage when I get those letters.

I call them the "Let's send these until the polls tell us what we think" leters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Yes, I hate them. I always called them
"My position until I am able to make a deal" letters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kalian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. Heck no!
and that's my final answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
8. No
"In a world of comprimise, some don't" - Heckler and Koch, GmbH
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Young Socialist Donating Member (83 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
9. no F'ing way!
AWB was a useless piece of "feel good" legislation that did nothing to reduce crime and everything to frustrate law-abiding military firearms collectors. the antis just don't get it, we may need these arms one day...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
10. haha
Yeah right.

That's actually what I've been expecting to happen. A last minute amendment to the lawsuit preemption bill to renew/expand the assault weapons ban. Then Bush can pull a Reagan and give a little speech about how he's protecting gun owners rights as he signs it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Because I disagree doesn't mean I don't expect it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. The only thing that makes me
think that it won't happen is that s 659 just doesn't have a funny enough title. Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act? Please.

Firearms Owners' Protection Act. Now there is an uproariously hilarious name for a law.

I'll be worried when I see a bill titled "The Gun Rights Restoration Act." It will probably ban all semi-automatic firearms and those that hold more than one round in the magazine, detachable or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reddouglasfir Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. What is wrong with that( besides it helps Bush)?
I mean if the Dems were smart they would use the AWB against Bush.

But I still think both bills should be merged and passed.

Both sides should not get a clear victory.

I wanna see some spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I'm all for compromise
as I've said in the past. I just think gun owners compromised a little too far last century. Maybe this century we can swing things back to a more reasonable level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reddouglasfir Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Good
Then when both bills are combined and passed the gun issue is dead.

The Dem can then win PA and WV without too much trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Dead?
How so?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Columbia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Hmm...
Edited on Sat Feb-21-04 10:12 PM by Columbia
Maybe he means a bill that repeals all state and federal gun control legislation to NFA '34 and a bill that establishes universal Vermont style carry? Now THAT is when the gun issue would be dead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Sadly I wouldn't live to enjoy it.
As I would keel over from a heart attack the moment it passed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reddouglasfir Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Name two other gun issues in this election
Please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. I don't understand.
Do you mean current bills? There are a few AWB renewals and expansions floating around, I believe, in addition to the s1034 one.

Do you think that if s 659 and s 1034 pass the gun issue just disappears?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reddouglasfir Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Yes
Unless the whackos on both sides can't shut up.

Of course Brady and Lapierre are ALWAYS running their mouths.

Ain't never satisfied.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. I think you're mistaken.
Let's assume both bills pass. Do you think that people who are against either of them are just going to throw up their hands and say, "well the gun issue is dead this for this election," and then go and vote for the very people who passed both bills? Or do you think maybe the voters will remember that some jackass passed one bill or the other and maybe not vote for said jackass?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reddouglasfir Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Well the gun issue will be dead
The politicians will have put it behind them and the media will shut up.

For extremists on both sides, no, but they are extremists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. I'll have to take your word for it. (nt)
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. The media is pretty much out of it...
Even now, it is self generated publicity from RKBA and anti-RKBA groups which even makes guns an issue. Without Brady, VPC, MMM, NRA, GOA, SAF, ..., the issue would be dead now.

Why should the RKBA side agree to extending the AWB. It is unlikely to pass in the House. Remember, the House voted to repeal the AWB in 96.

S. 659 has a lot of support in the Senate. It may not defeat a filibuster, but it is close. And Daschle has signed on. Repugs would love to see this bill defeated by filibuster. I can hear the gnashing of teeth in every contested Senate race in South and West.

Worst case for Bush would be passage of AWB sunset repeal. He has said he would sign, this would virtually ensure a Dem victory. Worst case for our side is passage of an expansion bill. If there is enough backbone for a veto, Bush claims the expansion goes too far beyond the current ban and the Democrats in gun-friendly districts are attacked on the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hijinks Donating Member (58 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #27
33. I could care less about gun company immunity
The AWB is another story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. Until a jury makes an award analagous to...
The $6 million to the woman for "cofee burns" at the drive thru. I do not care equally, but the anti's have stated an intent to do in court what has failed in legislation:
"The Legal Action Project is a national public interest law program dedicated to reducing gun violence. The Project seeks to achieve reform of the gun industry by providing pro bono legal representation to individual victims of gun violence and their families in suits against gun manufacturers and sellers. The Project also assists in the defense of reasonable gun laws when they are attacked in the courts."


http://www.gunlawsuits.org/probono/victims.asp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #25
31. that's what happened with the AW ban...
they passed it and put it behind them. Once the election happened, and a whole bunch of Democrats didn't get to come back to congress, how can you say it was a dead issue? They passed it, and ended up falling on their proverbial swords because of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
43. It'll never be dead.
Here's one issue.

S 1087 "Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2003". Probably not as hot a topic as lawsuit immunity or the AWB.

Right now the AWB and lawsuit bills are the foundation for further legislation for both sides.

The antis are still seeking legislation on .50 BMG weapons, ballistic finger printing, "sniper" rifles...

Give them an inch and they'll take a mile. The best plan of defense is not to allow them that inch.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. Ooh-Rah
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #15
30. not even close....
the AW ban is the Democrat's baby. If it's renewed, we're screwed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Withergyld Donating Member (685 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
35. The AWB is ineffective
How has it reduced crime and kept weapons out of the hands of criminals??
Assault weapons are rarely used by criminals, therefore strengthening the AWB will STILL have a minimal effect on crime/criminals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lcordero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
21. NO
I support no compromises. I will not support ANY limiting of gun rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alwynsw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #21
28. I totally agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
32. No way
Bad lawsuits usually go down in due process, so S659 is a "nice to have" but not really necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BullDozer Donating Member (754 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #32
45. Too much wasted money
Bad lawsuits still cost the defendants in them alot of money to win.

Unless the courts actually grow a pair and start telling people like Pam Grunow to shut up and get out of the courthouse with your claptrap then S659 and the house version HR1036 need to be put in place.

Notice the names attached to S659: S. 659: "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was introduced by Sens. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and is cosponsored by Democrats Daschle, BREAUX, DORGAN, JOHNSON, LANDRIEU, LINCOLN, MILLER, Nelson (Nebraska), and Reed.

Plus HR1036 passed the house 285-140 with the power balance being:
Republicans: 229
Democrats: 205
Independents: 1

These bills have support from both sides and should be passed and signed into law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
39. No way.
Gun owners compromised in CA with the assault weapons issue there.
Then they compromised some more. Now, there is pretty much nothing left of that issue to compromise on in CA.

When gun owners compromise, they lose. Period.

The more I think about it, compromise is the LAST thing gun owners should do.

In my opinion, the gun control movement has nothing to offer. It has nothing to give. It seeks to take plenty from every law abiding citizen though. A greater or lesser degree of taking, versus a greater or lesser degree of giving on the part of gun owners, is hardly what I would characterize as a compromise.


How can there be a compromise when one side gives and the other takes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
41. Nope, no way
Are pro-choice people willing to compromise on abortion?
Are minorities willing to compromise on civil rights/affirmative action?
Are Homosexuals and Lesbians willing to compromise on Gay marriage?

Then why should gun owners be willing to compromise on issues that relate to them?

I've made my position clear in the past... never allow your enemy an inch of ground... and that includes compromise.

As it stands now, S 659 has a better than average chance of passing. Whether it passes with any attached amendments remains to be seen. It's possible S 1034 (Feinstein), could be attached in the Senate (I think S 1431 is very unlikely... I'm not that certain about the "loophole" amendment). However, it'll have to be kicked back to the House where I really doubt any revised version that contains AWB or gunshow language will be accepted.

There is one other possibility that I've never seen mentioned; S 659 could be revised to excluded dealers from immunity (leaving distributors and manufacturers injunctive relief). Another consideration is rewording the bill so that current and pending (but no future), litigation is allowed to continue. If it came down to either (or both), it might be acceptable to both the Senate and the House.


I'm certain this is part of the antis strategy. If the promised filibuster is blocked, then the amendments become the back-up to kill the bill. It also gives them some insight of what to expect when (if), the stand alone bills come up for a vote.

As much as I'd like to see S 659 pass as it currently is, I don't see it as a major loss if it fails on a floor vote. If it fails because of a filibuster or amendments, then I see it as a stalemate.

Thirty-three states already have some sort of lawsuit preemption. We'll just have to hit one state at a time the way we did for CCW.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-23-04 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
46. locking thread
Edited on Mon Feb-23-04 03:01 PM by lunabush
original has not returned to further defend the thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 18th 2024, 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC