Gun Vote " Shameful Day," Obama Says

[Publicus]

2 of the biggest hypocrites in the United States Senate feinstein & schumer both carry handguns. Despite being guarded by secret service full time. It's OK for them to carry weapons , just not "the little people".

The muppett standing next to obama, gabrielle giffords was one of the biggest sport shooting gun advocates in the US prior to being shot. Now she is a pawn.

Members of Congress do not get Secret Service protection. The president, vice president and members of their families get Secret Service protection, as do the 15 heads of the executive departments of the U.S. Government. The Secret Service is in fact the Executive Protection Service.

Members of Congress are legislators, not executives, all of whom are protected by the U.S. Capitol Police. The U.S. Capitol Police were established by the Congress to protect Members of Congress and the buildings and grounds while Members of Congress are in Washington. U.S. Capitol Police don't ordinarily leave the Capitol Buildings or their grounds. While I worked in the Congress, I did occasionally see a Capitol Police officer escort to a Capitol Hill home a woman Member of Congress after the Congress had worked late into the night.

Sen Schumer of New York and Sen Feinstein of California carry because, as the Senate's leading advocates of gun safety, each get numerous death threats. Sen Feinstein herself suffered a traumatic gun experience while President of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco: "White fled the scene as Feinstein entered the office where Milk lay dead. She grabbed his wrist for a pulse, her finger entering Milk's bullet wound. Horrified, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief after identifying both bodies. Feinstein then tearfully announced the murders to a stunned public, stating: "As President of the Board of Supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed. The suspect is Supervisor Dan White." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone%E2%80%93Milk_assassinations

I notice in reading this thread that the same small circular firing squad of absolutist gun advocates dominate the discussion from that side. The absolutists are actually trying to acquit the NRA of their role in, by a vote of the minority of the Senate, defeating the gun safety bill. That's extreme.

Then Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic Member of Congress was holding an outdoor meeting with constituents when she was shot in the head by a lunatic. We the people need the new background checks the defeated legislation would have provided.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Publicus

[chuckd]

2 of the biggest hypocrites in the United States Senate feinstein & schumer both carry handguns. Despite being guarded by secret service full time. It's OK for them to carry weapons , just not "the little people".

The muppett standing next to obama, gabrielle giffords was one of the biggest sport shooting gun advocates in the US prior to being shot. Now she is a pawn.

Members of Congress do not get Secret Service protection. The president, vice president and members of their families get Secret Service protection, as do the 15 heads of the executive departments of the U.S. Government. The Secret Service is in fact the Executive Protection Service.

Members of Congress are legislators, not executives, all of whom are protected by the U.S. Capitol Police. The U.S. Capitol Police were established by the Congress to protect Members of Congress and the buildings and grounds while Members of Congress are in Washington. U.S. Capitol Police don't ordinarily leave the Capitol Buildings or their grounds. While I worked in the Congress, I did occasionally see a Capitol Police officer escort to a Capitol Hill home a woman Member of Congress after the Congress had worked late into the night.

Sen Schumer of New York and Sen Feinstein of California carry because, as the Senate's leading advocates of gun safety, each get numerous death threats. Sen Feinstein herself suffered a traumatic gun experience while President of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco: "White fled the scene as Feinstein entered the office where Milk lay dead. She grabbed his wrist for a pulse, her finger entering Milk's bullet wound. Horrified, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief after identifying both bodies. Feinstein then tearfully announced the murders to a stunned public, stating: "As President of the Board of Supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed. The suspect is Supervisor Dan White." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone%E2%80%93Milk_assassinations

I notice in reading this thread that the same small circular firing squad of absolutist gun advocates dominate the discussion from that side. The absolutists are actually trying to acquit the NRA of their role in, by a vote of the minority of the Senate, defeating the gun safety bill. That's extreme.

Then Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic Member of Congress was holding an outdoor meeting with constituents when she was shot in the head by a lunatic. We the people need the new background checks the defeated legislation would have provided.

Normally I tend to agree with your posts. Not on this subject however so permit me to make a couple of comments.

1. We, the people, also need to set some rather strict guidelines for identifying those crazies among us that carry these acts of cowardice out. Massacres don't happen unless somebody is there to pull the trigger.

2. You might not like the rule on Cloture, but it is still the Senate rule and has been in effect for nearly 100 years. It has benefited both parties over the years and, should the Democrats lose control of the Senate, will likely help them block questionable legislation when that happens.

[NeverSure]

2 of the biggest hypocrites in the United States Senate feinstein & schumer both carry handguns. Despite being guarded by secret service full time. It's OK for them to carry weapons , just not "the little people".

The muppett standing next to obama, gabrielle giffords was one of the biggest sport shooting gun advocates in the US prior to being shot. Now she is a pawn.

Members of Congress do not get Secret Service protection. The president, vice president and members of their families get Secret Service protection, as do the 15 heads of the executive departments of the U.S. Government. The Secret Service is in fact the Executive Protection Service.

Members of Congress are legislators, not executives, all of whom are protected by the U.S. Capitol Police. The U.S. Capitol Police were established by the Congress to protect Members of Congress and the buildings and grounds while Members of Congress are in Washington. U.S. Capitol Police don't ordinarily leave the Capitol Buildings or their grounds. While I worked in the Congress, I did occasionally see a Capitol Police officer escort to a Capitol Hill home a woman Member of Congress after the Congress had worked late into the night.

Sen Schumer of New York and Sen Feinstein of California carry because, as the Senate's leading advocates of gun safety, each get numerous death threats. Sen Feinstein herself suffered a traumatic gun experience while President of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco: "White fled the scene as Feinstein entered the office where Milk lay dead. She grabbed his wrist for a pulse, her finger entering Milk's bullet wound. Horrified, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief after identifying both bodies. Feinstein then tearfully announced the murders to a stunned public, stating: "As President of the Board of Supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed. The suspect is Supervisor Dan White." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone%E2%80%93Milk_assassinations

I notice in reading this thread that the same small circular firing squad of absolutist gun advocates dominate the discussion from that side. The absolutists are actually trying to acquit the NRA of their role in, by a vote of the minority of the Senate, defeating the gun safety bill. That's extreme.

Then Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic Member of Congress was holding an outdoor meeting with constituents when she was shot in the head by a lunatic. We the people need the new background checks the defeated legislation would have provided.

Background checks don't apply to criminals and the insane. Background checks are just another way for the government to spy on law abiding citizens. They would have an inventory of every gun I own by serial # etc. What is in my house has never been any of their business and that's another constitutional argument about my right to be secure in my possessions, and their need for probable cause to inventory my belongings.

There WAS a background check run on Jared Lee Loughner, the shooter. The gun was a hand gun, not even a rifle. It was a plain jane 9mm pistol. He bought it from a national chain store which would have to run the police records check, ID and fingerprint him.

He had a history of bizarre behavior which got him kicked out of school. He had a history of drug abuse. People thought he was weird, especially toward the end. When captured he was diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic. Yet he was walking around when he should have already been locked in a mental ward. Link

While I too generally agree with your posts, this one just proves the futility of proposed new laws.

Until they start enforcing the laws we have, and locking up criminals and the insane, no one is safe.

[Publicus]

2 of the biggest hypocrites in the United States Senate feinstein & schumer both carry handguns. Despite being guarded by secret service full time. It's OK for them to carry weapons , just not "the little people".

The muppett standing next to obama, gabrielle giffords was one of the biggest sport shooting gun advocates in the US prior to being shot. Now she is a pawn.

Members of Congress do not get Secret Service protection. The president, vice president and members of their families get Secret Service protection, as do the 15 heads of the executive departments of the U.S. Government. The Secret Service is in fact the Executive Protection Service.

Members of Congress are legislators, not executives, all of whom are protected by the U.S. Capitol Police. The U.S. Capitol Police were established by the Congress to protect Members of Congress and the buildings and grounds while Members of Congress are in Washington. U.S. Capitol Police don't ordinarily leave the Capitol Buildings or their grounds. While I worked in the Congress, I did occasionally see a Capitol Police officer escort to a Capitol Hill home a woman Member of Congress after the Congress had worked late into the night.

Sen Schumer of New York and Sen Feinstein of California carry because, as the Senate's leading advocates of gun safety, each get numerous death threats. Sen Feinstein herself suffered a traumatic gun experience while President of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco: "White fled the scene as Feinstein entered the office where Milk lay dead. She grabbed his wrist for a pulse, her finger entering Milk's bullet wound. Horrified, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief after identifying both bodies. Feinstein then tearfully announced the murders to a stunned public, stating: "As President of the Board of Supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed. The suspect is Supervisor Dan White." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone%E2%80%93Milk_assassinations

I notice in reading this thread that the same small circular firing squad of absolutist gun advocates dominate the discussion from that side. The absolutists are actually trying to acquit the NRA of their role in, by a vote of the minority of the Senate, defeating the gun safety bill. That's extreme.

Then Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic Member of Congress was holding an outdoor meeting with constituents when she was shot in the head by a lunatic. We the people need the new background checks the defeated legislation would have provided.

Normally I tend to agree with your posts. Not on this subject however so permit me to make a couple of comments.

1. We, the people, also need to set some rather strict guidelines for identifying those crazies among us that carry these acts of cowardice out. Massacres don't happen unless somebody is there to pull the trigger.

2. You might not like the rule on Cloture, but it is still the Senate rule and has been in effect for nearly 100 years. It has benefited both parties over the years and, should the Democrats lose control of the Senate, will likely help them block questionable legislation when that happens.

That is true chuckd, that you and I pretty much agree on most of the issues most of the time, consistently so. That's also true of some of the posters who are posting absolutist views against gun safety to this thread topic. I appreciate that individually people's POV and beliefs can and do vary concerning a given issue, time, circumstance.

Working in the Congress as professional staff did give me a first-hand knowledge of the rules, practices and procedures of the place, and both a professional and personal appreciation of the dedication the Members of Congress bring to their responsibilities.

Conversely, sometime we professional staff would sit to catch our breath for a moment - we'd wonder how anything every gets done in the Congress because of the self-centered obsession they have to get re-elected. Too often it seemed that's all any of 'em care about.

So I'd say the ongoing gridlock in Washington is focused on the 435 (voting) Members of the House and the 100 over on the Senate side. That's 535 Members of Congress, each of whom thinks and believes he/she is president of the constituency of voters that elected each of 'em.

A lot of the long standing rules, practices and procedures of the Congress need to be updated as a specific response to the perpetual gridlock that has itself become the rule in Washington. The days when it required a cumbersome and laborious Act of Congress to produce an Act of Congress are gone forever.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Publicus

[SteeleJoe]

2 of the biggest hypocrites in the United States Senate feinstein & schumer both carry handguns. Despite being guarded by secret service full time.

Since when do they get Secret Service protection?

Have they come out against all people owning or carrying weapons in any circumstance?

[NeverSure]

2 of the biggest hypocrites in the United States Senate feinstein & schumer both carry handguns. Despite being guarded by secret service full time. It's OK for them to carry weapons , just not "the little people".

The muppett standing next to obama, gabrielle giffords was one of the biggest sport shooting gun advocates in the US prior to being shot. Now she is a pawn.

Members of Congress do not get Secret Service protection. The president, vice president and members of their families get Secret Service protection, as do the 15 heads of the executive departments of the U.S. Government. The Secret Service is in fact the Executive Protection Service.

Members of Congress are legislators, not executives, all of whom are protected by the U.S. Capitol Police. The U.S. Capitol Police were established by the Congress to protect Members of Congress and the buildings and grounds while Members of Congress are in Washington. U.S. Capitol Police don't ordinarily leave the Capitol Buildings or their grounds. While I worked in the Congress, I did occasionally see a Capitol Police officer escort to a Capitol Hill home a woman Member of Congress after the Congress had worked late into the night.

Sen Schumer of New York and Sen Feinstein of California carry because, as the Senate's leading advocates of gun safety, each get numerous death threats. Sen Feinstein herself suffered a traumatic gun experience while President of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco: "White fled the scene as Feinstein entered the office where Milk lay dead. She grabbed his wrist for a pulse, her finger entering Milk's bullet wound. Horrified, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief after identifying both bodies. Feinstein then tearfully announced the murders to a stunned public, stating: "As President of the Board of Supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed. The suspect is Supervisor Dan White." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone%E2%80%93Milk_assassinations

I notice in reading this thread that the same small circular firing squad of absolutist gun advocates dominate the discussion from that side. The absolutists are actually trying to acquit the NRA of their role in, by a vote of the minority of the Senate, defeating the gun safety bill. That's extreme.

Then Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic Member of Congress was holding an outdoor meeting with constituents when she was shot in the head by a lunatic. We the people need the new background checks the defeated legislation would have provided.

Normally I tend to agree with your posts. Not on this subject however so permit me to make a couple of comments.

1. We, the people, also need to set some rather strict guidelines for identifying those crazies among us that carry these acts of cowardice out. Massacres don't happen unless somebody is there to pull the trigger.

2. You might not like the rule on Cloture, but it is still the Senate rule and has been in effect for nearly 100 years. It has benefited both parties over the years and, should the Democrats lose control of the Senate, will likely help them block questionable legislation when that happens.

That is true chuckd, that you and I pretty much agree on most of the issues most of the time, consistently so. That's also true of some of the posters who are posting absolutist views against gun safety to this thread topic. I appreciate that individually people's POV and beliefs can and do vary concerning a given issue, time, circumstance.

Working in the Congress as professional staff did give me a first-hand knowledge of the rules, practices and procedures of the place, and both a professional and personal appreciation of the dedication the Members of Congress bring to their responsibilities.

Conversely, sometime we professional staff would sit to catch our breath for a moment - we'd wonder how anything every gets done in the Congress because of the self-centered obsession they have to get re-elected. Too often it seemed that's all any of 'em care about.

So I'd say the ongoing gridlock in Washington is focused on the 435 (voting) Members of the House and the 100 over on the Senate side. That's 535 Members of Congress, each of whom thinks and believes he/she is president of the constituency of voters that elected each of 'em.

A lot of the long standing rules, practices and procedures of the Congress need to be updated as a specific response to the perpetual gridlock that has itself become the rule in Washington. The days when it required a cumbersome and laborious Act of Congress to produce an Act of Congress are gone forever.

I don't understand this. You have a problem with representatives representing the will of the people who elected them? You have a problem with congressmen voting as their constituents wish them to?

I have a problem with the opposite and so do enough others that I've seen such "representatives" voted out of office for betraying those who trusted and elected them. I think representatives should represent, and know that if they don't they'll lose the next election.

They aren't elected King to rule over their subjects. They aren't expected to think they know better than those who elected them.

I don't get this part at all.

[Publicus]

NeverSure I'm confident you can appreciate that Members of Congress are selective concerning the many sub-constituencies that comprise the entire constituency each represents. (You and I also usually share the same views on issues at TVF so I too appreciate and respect that an occasional difference can exist among individual citizens.)

Each of us is selective in respect to the threads we visit at TVF. Because people make choices, we exclude; we also prioritize things important to our lives - this is not a news bulletin to you or I (or anyone else). So why should the Congress or the White House, or the Supreme Court for that matter, be any different? Because they are elected to represent us (the SCOTUS exempted)?

Really, it is fact that a pro-life Member of Congress for example always "finds" s/he hasn't any time to meet with pro-choice constituents - on the whole they always vote against you no matter what. And vice-versa concerning this example. Members of Congress are in fact always busy, always on the go; they need to use their precious time in the best ways each of 'em deems necessary to him/her. They are practical in their everyday lives. Some decades ago Congress constructed a subway shuttle system under Capitol Hill which runs between the office buildings and the Capitol building because it saves time. If you always walk, you will spent a fifth of your time each day walking instead of being present and doing.

So as much as politicians would love to get 100% of the vote every election, they know the Congress is more than a constituent assembly which must absolutely adhere to the constituent's point of view all of the time, or even most of the time. Congress is instead a representative body that governs the republic. Who always agrees with every item in the voting record of his/her senators or member of the house?

The recent trend of the Congress to become increasingly dogmatic - more so presently than at any time since the conclusion of the Civil War - means you or I get listened to less and less all the time. If you are in Kentucky, are you actually going to try to convince Sen Rand Paul he should vote for the gun safety legislation? The likely response anyway would be Kentucky windage to you or I.

I own one piece in the United States, a 22-caliber automatic handgun. It and four previous years in the army infantry helped me considerably on one specific occasion, which is the just in case reason I'd bought it. Your collection sounds fascinating to view and, carefully, perhaps to handle somewhat. I can see you are a firearms aficionado but also a connoisseur and an investor, not to mention an appreciator of light weapons of historical value, all of which I do respect and defend. I recognize and respect that you have every right to pursue your personal interests.

As to the paranoid schizophrenic who shot the Democratic former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords in the head, maybe the gun store owner needed to be more observant or diligent in the instance of that particular customer. It can be done discretely. We don't want to discourage sales, but neither do we want to encourage lunatics.

[Publicus]

Publicus, here is another take on the so called 90%. http://www.mediaite.com/online/so-much-for-the-90-percent-poll-shows-gun-control-legislations-failure-greeted-with-relief-by-many/

You have your take on your so called 90%. So now you can read some factual polling data on the 90%.

http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-votes-approval-ratings-pat-toomey-kelly-ayotte-background-checks-2013-4?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Politics%20Select&utm_campaign=Politics%20Select%202013-04-26&utm_content=emailshare

[JDGRUEN]

NeverSure, on 29 Apr 2013 - 00:12, said:

Publicus, on 28 Apr 2013 - 23:11, said:

snarky66, on 28 Apr 2013 - 12:56, said:

2 of the biggest hypocrites in the United States Senate feinstein & schumer both carry handguns. Despite being guarded by secret service full time. It's OK for them to carry weapons , just not "the little people".

The muppett standing next to obama, gabrielle giffords was one of the biggest sport shooting gun advocates in the US prior to being shot. Now she is a pawn.

Members of Congress do not get Secret Service protection. The president, vice president and members of their families get Secret Service protection, as do the 15 heads of the executive departments of the U.S. Government. The Secret Service is in fact the Executive Protection Service.

Members of Congress are legislators, not executives, all of whom are protected by the U.S. Capitol Police. The U.S. Capitol Police were established by the Congress to protect Members of Congress and the buildings and grounds while Members of Congress are in Washington. U.S. Capitol Police don't ordinarily leave the Capitol Buildings or their grounds. While I worked in the Congress, I did occasionally see a Capitol Police officer escort to a Capitol Hill home a woman Member of Congress after the Congress had worked late into the night.

Sen Schumer of New York and Sen Feinstein of California carry because, as the Senate's leading advocates of gun safety, each get numerous death threats. Sen Feinstein herself suffered a traumatic gun experience while President of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco: "White fled the scene as Feinstein entered the office where Milk lay dead. She grabbed his wrist for a pulse, her finger entering Milk's bullet wound. Horrified, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief after identifying both bodies. Feinstein then tearfully announced the murders to a stunned public, stating: "As President of the Board of Supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed. The suspect is Supervisor Dan White." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone%E2%80%93Milk_assassinations

I notice in reading this thread that the same small circular firing squad of absolutist gun advocates dominate the discussion from that side. The absolutists are actually trying to acquit the NRA of their role in, by a vote of the minority of the Senate, defeating the gun safety bill. That's extreme.

Then Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic Member of Congress was holding an outdoor meeting with constituents when she was shot in the head by a lunatic. We the people need the new background checks the defeated legislation would have provided.

Background checks don't apply to criminals and the insane. Background checks are just another way for the government to spy on law abiding citizens. They would have an inventory of every gun I own by serial # etc. What is in my house has never been any of their business and that's another constitutional argument about my right to be secure in my possessions, and their need for probable cause to inventory my belongings.

There WAS a background check run on Jared Lee Loughner, the shooter. The gun was a hand gun, not even a rifle. It was a plain jane 9mm pistol. He bought it from a national chain store which would have to run the police records check, ID and fingerprint him.

He had a history of bizarre behavior which got him kicked out of school. He had a history of drug abuse. People thought he was weird, especially toward the end. When captured he was diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic. Yet he was walking around when he should have already been locked in a mental ward. Link

While I too generally agree with your posts, this one just proves the futility of proposed new laws.

Until they start enforcing the laws we have, and locking up criminals and the insane, no one is safe.

It was well known by a number of people that Loughner (the mass shooter) went on and on about 'lucid' dreams (while not sleeping) - a.k.a hallucinations aside from displaying other definitive off base behaviors not to mention what was revealed to mental health practitioners . But no one did anything about it. No one wanted to attempt to surmount the hurdles and blockages to get his committed and confined. It is next to impossible in some states. This story is like a broken record in mass shootings. But government and do-gooders want to put more gun restrictions on sane law abiding citizens because they don't want to remove the barriers to commitment and confinement since they don't want to hurt the person's feelings.

Edited April 29, 2013 by JDGRUEN

[JDGRUEN]

When it comes to the people of the USA being protected and well served by elected officials, as in the case of the recent gun legislation 'grid lock' is the best thing that ever happened to the country. There is a mania that runs about in Congress that they MUST pass bills - often regardless if the bill is beneficial or not The Member of Congress just wants a track record to point to in order to say 'see what I've done! - isn't it great?' When Republicans won back the House in 2010, I was overjoyed at the prospect of Grid Lock... This would keep obama from doing as little harm to the country as possible. Grid Lock on the gun issue is a great benefit. Because now with the Spring Primaries coming up - then the fall elections of 2014 coupled with never ending re-election campaigns - we get Grid Lock on steroids. Hallelujah Brother! Despite the rumblings about bringing back the 'Gun Bill' from certain Senators in the spotlight - most of the Senators and almost all the Members of the House don't want anything to do with the gun bill or any other controversial legislation. They want to be re-elected first and foremost. And - the only reason Senators like Manchin are back already pushing the rebirth of the Gun Bill is that behind the scenes obama is throwing fits and making political threats. Senator Toomey made a big mistake in sponsoring this cow dung - he is being roasted 10 and 20 to 1 on his Facebook page. Just a few more delays and the fizzling Gun Bill frenzy will die a quiet death despite obama's mania to advance the timetable.of his agenda.

Mark Twain said "There should only be one order of business before Congress each term - that is to Adjourn" ... and Twain also said "There is only one criminal class in America - Congress!"

[beechguy]

Publicus, here is another take on the so called 90%. http://www.mediaite.com/online/so-much-for-the-90-percent-poll-shows-gun-control-legislations-failure-greeted-with-relief-by-many/

You have your take on your so called 90%. So now you can read some factual polling data on the 90%.

http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-votes-approval-ratings-pat-toomey-kelly-ayotte-background-checks-2013-4?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Politics%20Select&utm_campaign=Politics%20Select%202013-04-26&utm_content=emailshare

There is more to this than 2 Senators. Are you saying the other writers, pollsters are liars?

Frankly, I think it was a good thing it failed, just political grandstanding, by Obama in particular, and wasn't really going to solve any problems.

[Publicus]

Publicus, here is another take on the so called 90%. http://www.mediaite.com/online/so-much-for-the-90-percent-poll-shows-gun-control-legislations-failure-greeted-with-relief-by-many/

You have your take on your so called 90%. So now you can read some factual polling data on the 90%.

http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-votes-approval-ratings-pat-toomey-kelly-ayotte-background-checks-2013-4?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Politics%20Select&utm_campaign=Politics%20Select%202013-04-26&utm_content=emailshare

There is more to this than 2 Senators. Are you saying the other writers, pollsters are liars?

Frankly, I think it was a good thing it failed, just political grandstanding, by Obama in particular, and wasn't really going to solve any problems.

Scientific public opinion survey research organizations vary in their methodology, the nature and size of representative samplings, margin or error, the respective number of Republicans, Democrats and Independents it surveys, which is an important factor in accuracy, and in many other ways. How many cell phone users does each organization survey, i.e., voters who don't have land line phones - this has become a major factor in determining the reliability and confidence one can have in a particular poll by a given polling organization. The nature of the questions are always a critical factor in the outcome of any survey. Etc.

Certain organizations are well established, reputable, reliable and commonly accepted for their accuracy and integrity. In the 2012 election campaign, for instance, Public Policy Polling came out ranked number one in the country. The main reason is that it correctly calculated the demographics of the voter turnout on election day, which other organizations missed by varying degrees.

Conversely, the USA Survey organization got widely condemned during the 2008 campaign for cooking its incomplete and limited data against Obama and his campaign. They got caught red handed by their peers in their own industry. Conversely, pollster Stu Rothenberg is a Republican biased pollster who cares about his reputation so he never cooks his data. I read his polls and political analysis regularly, election year or not, because Stu is reliable, reputable.

In my posts to this thread topic I've cited reliable and respected polling organizations: the Pew Center, CNN, PPP. There are many others. Do you want the long list of respected and reliable polling organizations, or could these three representative reputable ones possibly do it for you?

[beechguy]

Publicus, here is another take on the so called 90%. http://www.mediaite.com/online/so-much-for-the-90-percent-poll-shows-gun-control-legislations-failure-greeted-with-relief-by-many/

You have your take on your so called 90%. So now you can read some factual polling data on the 90%.

http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-votes-approval-ratings-pat-toomey-kelly-ayotte-background-checks-2013-4?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Politics%20Select&utm_campaign=Politics%20Select%202013-04-26&utm_content=emailshare

There is more to this than 2 Senators. Are you saying the other writers, pollsters are liars?

Frankly, I think it was a good thing it failed, just political grandstanding, by Obama in particular, and wasn't really going to solve any problems.

Scientific public opinion survey research organizations vary in their methodology, the nature and size of representative samplings, margin or error, the respective number of Republicans, Democrats and Independents it surveys, which is an important factor in accuracy, and in many other ways. How many cell phone users does each organization survey, i.e., voters who don't have land line phones - this has become a major factor in determining the reliability and confidence one can have in a particular poll by a given polling organization. The nature of the questions are always a critical factor in the outcome of any survey. Etc.

Certain organizations are well established, reputable, reliable and commonly accepted for their accuracy and integrity. In the 2012 election campaign, for instance, Public Policy Polling came out ranked number one in the country. The main reason is that it correctly calculated the demographics of the voter turnout on election day, which other organizations missed by varying degrees.

Conversely, the USA Survey organization got widely condemned during the 2008 campaign for cooking its incomplete and limited data against Obama and his campaign. They got caught red handed by their peers in their own industry. Conversely, pollster Stu Rothenberg is a Republican biased pollster who cares about his reputation so he never cooks his data. I read his polls and political analysis regularly, election year or not, because Stu is reliable, reputable.

In my posts to this thread topic I've cited reliable and respected polling organizations: the Pew Center, CNN, PPP. There are many others. Do you want the long list of respected and reliable polling organizations, or could these three representative reputable ones possibly do it for you?

Your Washington experience is apparent. The article I linked was dicussing a Pew Poll, somehow when you use them they are acceptable, when I use them they are liars and incompetants. If you don't want to face the facts, that is up to you.

[Publicus]

When it comes to the people of the USA being protected and well served by elected officials, as in the case of the recent gun legislation 'grid lock' is the best thing that ever happened to the country. There is a mania that runs about in Congress that they MUST pass bills - often regardless if the bill is beneficial or not The Member of Congress just wants a track record to point to in order to say 'see what I've done! - isn't it great?' When Republicans won back the House in 2010, I was overjoyed at the prospect of Grid Lock... This would keep obama from doing as little harm to the country as possible. Grid Lock on the gun issue is a great benefit. Because now with the Spring Primaries coming up - then the fall elections of 2014 coupled with never ending re-election campaigns - we get Grid Lock on steroids. Hallelujah Brother! Despite the rumblings about bringing back the 'Gun Bill' from certain Senators in the spotlight - most of the Senators and almost all the Members of the House don't want anything to do with the gun bill or any other controversial legislation. They want to be re-elected first and foremost. And - the only reason Senators like Manchin are back already pushing the rebirth of the Gun Bill is that behind the scenes obama is throwing fits and making political threats. Senator Toomey made a big mistake in sponsoring this cow dung - he is being roasted 10 and 20 to 1 on his Facebook page. Just a few more delays and the fizzling Gun Bill frenzy will die a quiet death despite obama's mania to advance the timetable.of his agenda.

Mark Twain said "There should only be one order of business before Congress each term - that is to Adjourn" ... and Twain also said "There is only one criminal class in America - Congress!"

I prefer Dr Woodrow Wilson's voluminous work while he was on the faculty at Princeton, Congressional Government. It's an intellectually serious and respectable work. It doesn't have any folksy quotes, much less quotes misidentified as having been said by Mark Twain.

It was for instance Judge Gideon Tucker of New York who said, “No Man’s life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session”. This quote is another of the many misattributed to Mark Twain and various other nationally prominent humorists both of Twain's time and since.

So I don't pay much mind to folksy and populist quotes, many of which are unfortunately misattributed to Mark Twain. If you want populism while you're here in Thailand give Dubai a call - I'd bet the UN isn't your father either..

I'd rather cite the classic understanding of the U.S. political system and Washington practiced by Pres Reagan and House Speaker Tip O'Neil. Of opposite political faiths, as it were, they worked together to craft effective compromise legislation that still governs our lives today, and will for some time to come. That honest cooperation remains meaningful to the everyday and to the longer term lives of we the people of the United States.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Publicus

[Publicus]

@beechguy

I don't see how you have missed that my focus is on the new and extended background checks contained in the Manchin-Toomey bill that was defeated in the Senate by a minority vote.

[JDGRUEN]

When it comes to the people of the USA being protected and well served by elected officials, as in the case of the recent gun legislation 'grid lock' is the best thing that ever happened to the country. There is a mania that runs about in Congress that they MUST pass bills - often regardless if the bill is beneficial or not The Member of Congress just wants a track record to point to in order to say 'see what I've done! - isn't it great?' When Republicans won back the House in 2010, I was overjoyed at the prospect of Grid Lock... This would keep obama from doing as little harm to the country as possible. Grid Lock on the gun issue is a great benefit. Because now with the Spring Primaries coming up - then the fall elections of 2014 coupled with never ending re-election campaigns - we get Grid Lock on steroids. Hallelujah Brother! Despite the rumblings about bringing back the 'Gun Bill' from certain Senators in the spotlight - most of the Senators and almost all the Members of the House don't want anything to do with the gun bill or any other controversial legislation. They want to be re-elected first and foremost. And - the only reason Senators like Manchin are back already pushing the rebirth of the Gun Bill is that behind the scenes obama is throwing fits and making political threats. Senator Toomey made a big mistake in sponsoring this cow dung - he is being roasted 10 and 20 to 1 on his Facebook page. Just a few more delays and the fizzling Gun Bill frenzy will die a quiet death despite obama's mania to advance the timetable.of his agenda.

Mark Twain said "There should only be one order of business before Congress each term - that is to Adjourn" ... and Twain also said "There is only one criminal class in America - Congress!"

I prefer Dr Woodrow Wilson's voluminous work while he was on the faculty at Princeton, Congressional Government. It's an intellectually serious and respectable work. It doesn't have any folksy quotes, much less quotes misidentified as having been said by Mark Twain.

It was for instance Judge Gideon Tucker of New York who said, “No Man’s life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session”. This quote is another of the many misattributed to Mark Twain and various other nationally prominent humorists both of Twain's time and since.

So I don't pay much mind to folksy and populist quotes, many of which are unfortunately misattributed to Mark Twain. If you want populism while you're here in Thailand give Dubai a call - I'd bet the UN isn't your father either..

I'd rather cite the classic understanding of the U.S. political system and Washington practiced by Pres Reagan and House Speaker Tip O'Neil. Of opposite political faiths, as it were, they worked together to craft effective compromise legislation that still governs our lives today, and will for some time to come. That honest cooperation remains meaningful to the everyday and to the longer term lives of we the people of the United States.

Just a quick note to give you a reference on Twain's quotes... My paraphrasing was 'close but not cigar'.

It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.

Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar - Mark Twain. Pudd'nhead Wilson is a novel by Mark Twain. It was serialized in The Century Magazine (1893–4), before being published as a novel in 1894.

Also stated as: It is the foreign element that commits our crimes. There is no native criminal class except Congress.

Twain - More Maxims of Mark, Johnson, 1927

And as: There is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress. Twain, Following the Equator

I will go back to find verification of the other quote ... Meanwhile try these ... one by a folksy President.

This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer. Will Rogers

When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'present' or 'not guilty.' Theodore Roosevelt,

'Folksy' .. Folksy has a way of telling the unvarnished truth without the lies and deceit... Sorta like fog removal from a windshield.

On the subject of Congress ... I prefer a legislature where members stand for Principled Conservatism - with honor and respect for the Constitution. The kind of compromise you describe leads to little good. Reagan compromised with the Democrats on Amnesty. Later he said it was a mistake as the Democrats failed to work to keep promises on Border Control and millions more illegal aliens poured in. In more recent times we have seen Senator John McCain give away the store on important issues which only shows that compromising with Democrats on something like gun control legislation means that Democrats get 75% of what they want - then lie - and work to derail the 25% they didn't want after the bill is signed into law. Compromising with the Democrats on gun legislation will only result in murky and vague provisions that will be formed into draconian Federal Regulations going far beyond the scope of the original bill. Reagan dealt with a Democrat party that had reasonable people in the mix... Today's Democrats are dominated by Leftist Zealots who have no honor and will stop at nothing to get their way abusing the country in the process. Honest compromise with Democrats involved is impossible in current times.

[Publicus]

@JDGRUEN

Well, if we're flat out of honesty maybe the Republicans in control of the House could impeach Prez Obama? That would keep the House from doing much legislatively, thereby relieving them of legislating on gun safety, the budget, sequestering and many other matters of significance and importance.

While everyone knows the Senate would never vote to remove Obama from office, it also would stop all business in the Senate which as we know has a Democratic party majority in control there. It certainly would stop all the nonsense you see in this gun safety legislation that would establish new background checks and extend and improve existing laws in this respect.

Impeachment by the House and a trial in the Senate would really tie up Washington for the remainder of the year. I'd think you might like that.

[JDGRUEN]

@JDGRUEN

Well, if we're flat out of honesty maybe the Republicans in control of the House could impeach Prez Obama? That would keep the House from doing much legislatively, thereby relieving them of legislating on gun safety, the budget, sequestering and many other matters of significance and importance.

While everyone knows the Senate would never vote to remove Obama from office, it also would stop all business in the Senate which as we know has a Democratic party majority in control there. It certainly would stop all the nonsense you see in this gun safety legislation that would establish new background checks and extend and improve existing laws in this respect.

Impeachment by the House and a trial in the Senate would really tie up Washington for the remainder of the year. I'd think you might like that.

I knew you had it in 'ya there Publicus... I knew you would see the light ... in every liberal there is a sensible Conservative just busting to come out... I'm proud of you... excellent idea ... to keep that gun legislation from coming back again ... one hell of a stall... Love it...

[JDGRUEN]

I have to say ... I busted a gut laughing at this headline when I saw it ... Here I am debating with people who are ready to jump through fire to help the Democrats in their lofty quest to quell guns in America ... Doing everything they can to help fill the breech to repel those nasty gun favoring Republicans ... so what do the Democrats do -- they go recruiting Gun Loving Democrats to run for Congress - especially the Senate. I know you Democrat loving folks will want to send money to help the Democrats electing some Gun Loving Senators in those swing battleground states. These principled Democrats would Never stoop to electing people to high office that would vote pro gun would they? ... hehehehehehehehe - hahahahahahaha (or 555555) This is so funny ....!!!

"Democratic leaders are wooing staunchly pro-gun candidates to run in pivotal Senate races at the same time they are discussing a strategy for bringing gun control legislation back up for debate"

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/296559-democrats-push-gun-control-agenda-in-dc-but-not-in-battleground-states

Edited April 30, 2013 by JDGRUEN

[F430murci]

I have to say ... I busted a gut laughing at this headline when I saw it ... Here I am debating with people who are ready to jump through fire to help the Democrats in their lofty quest to quell guns in America ... Doing everything they can to help fill the breech to repel those nasty gun favoring Republicans ... so what do the Democrats do -- they go recruiting Gun Loving Democrats to run for Congress - especially the Senate. I know you Democrat loving folks will want to send money to help the Democrats electing some Gun Loving Senators in those swing battleground states. These principled Democrats would Never stoop to electing people to high office that would vote pro gun would they? ... hehehehehehehehe - hahahahahahaha (or 555555) This is so funny ....!!!

"Democratic leaders are wooing staunchly pro-gun candidates to run in pivotal Senate races at the same time they are discussing a strategy for bringing gun control legislation back up for debate"

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/296559-democrats-push-gun-control-agenda-in-dc-but-not-in-battleground-states

Pretty smart I'd say. More important to gain control for other more important issues. Newsflash, gun control is neither the only issue nor the most important issue. I'd wager say most don't really care, don't think it about on a day to day or month to month basis, and are not obsessed with any one issue except perhaps having a good economy and what restaurant to eat at tonight.

[JDGRUEN]

Have fun folks ... Since the Senate Gun Grabbing Bill is Dead ... I am out of here .... But if the gun haters actually get the Bill back on the Senate floor -- I'll be baaaaaaack ....

[NeverSure]

Sturm Ruger 1Q Earnings Soar 53%, Beat the Street

By Matthew Rocco

Published April 29, 2013

FOXBusiness

"Sturm, Ruger & Co.’s (RGR) first-quarter earnings raced 53% higher, as strong demand for firearms continued.

Like other gun manufacturers, Connecticut-based Ruger has benefited from a surge in demand for firearms.

According to the FBI, monthly background checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System—the industry’s best gauge of overall demand—have soared in recent years, while this year is on pace to be the strongest. January set a monthly record with more than 2.49 million background checks, and the first three months of 2013 have totaled more than 7.01 million checks.

In the latest quarter, Ruger’s profit was $23.7 million, or $1.20 a share, surpassing Wall Street estimates of $1.04 a share. The company reported a profit of $15.5 million, or 79 cents, in the year-ago period.

Sales climbed 39% to $155.9 million, above estimates of $131.7 million."

[NeverSure]

2.49 million background checks by the FBI in January, 2013 alone. 7.01 million for the first quarter.

7.01 million new guns owned by citizens in just 3 months.

[F430murci]

2.49 million background checks by the FBI in January, 2013 alone. 7.01 million for the first quarter.

7.01 million new guns owned by citizens in just 3 months.

And a billion Big Macs purchased by US citizens in January 2013.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted. Also deleted are inflammatory posts.

[F430murci]

Another one who probably won't even make a contribution to stattistic that any one cares about, but a frail human life nonetheless.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/29/17975914-ohio-high-schooler-attempts-suicide-in-front-of-classmates?lite

[F430murci]

Sounds like the government making progress despite the nay sayers and mirandizing bomber boy.

Law enforcement officials said they took a DNA sample Monday from Tamerlan's wife, Katherine Russell Tsarnaev, to compare to female DNA found on a piece of pressure cooker used to make one of the bombs.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/29/17974534-could-boston-bombing-suspect-avoid-death-penalty-talks-have-started?lite

Apparently, Judy Clarke, new attorney, is just anti death penalty, but one of her tactics is to persaude defendants to plead guilty to avoid death penalty. Candidly, as much as I hate for US to bear the expense of incarcerating him, this is fine by my and this young guy is in for an aweful, aweful experience for a very long time. Imagine no human contact, very small cell lit 24 hours a day, food and medicine comes through a think slot, solid steel door with no view of anything or knowledge whether it is day or night. Guilty plea also keep him out of trial and media circus which he may rather enjoy and saves many thousands in appeals of right regarding death sentences.

[Publicus]

Five more Senators who voted against the increased gun safety bill are now seeing their approval ratings suddenly plunge in their home states. Voters say the senators' vote against made them less likely to vote again for the reelection of each Senator.

I already presented what is now the sixth Senator, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, whose approval rating plunged by 15 points in her state, putting her "underwater" for the first time, i.e., more people disapprove of her job in Congress than approve.

I'd already pointed out that 83% of Americans favor the new and increased background checks killed by the defeat of the bill. The new Gallop poll found 65% of Americans believe the Senate should have passed the bill as a whole.

Here's the story about the latest new polling that shows the disapproval of we the people against the additional five Senators who voted to defeat new background checks by a minority vote of the Senate.

Perhaps one day soon we'll get back to the bedrock principle of a viable democracy that the majority rules.

http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-votes-approval-ratings-poll-senators-2013-4

Edited April 30, 2013 by Publicus

[GentlemanJim]

Well, I have taken the advice on the thread about the 5 year old who killed his sister. It has been locked and we were told that there are lots of other threads on Gun Control so use them. Well I looked and they have all been locked as well. So as this is the only thread I can find that does not appear to be locked then here it is. Gun control........children with guns..!

[Morden]

No one has freedom to kill anyone in the U.S.... What an absurd statement you make! Over the past decade or more the few mass shootings in America have been done by mentally disturbed people (who were diagnosed as having serious mental health issues (prone to violence) PRIOR to incident. Most often fueled by violent movies and video games, these nut cases managed to get a gun mostly by circumventing the law ... then acted out their violent delusions and fantasies. Next, the politically correct segment of our society - who fights against committing and confining (institutionalizing) these nut cases - act shocked and surprised. You know, if you as a non American are going to criticize our laws and culture - then how about using a little perspective. Get a grip on reality and take a look at the real problem instead of emotionally thrashing about and talking nonsense.

People thinking guns are not a 'real' problem is the problem.

For 99.99999 percent of the up to 100 million law abiding gun owners in American who own up to 300 million guns - their possession and use of guns is not a problem to anyone.

So...I know, I am not an American and therefore oppressed by my respective government and unfree and all that.

But tell me one thing: why do these 100 Million law abiding gun- owners need an average of 3 guns?

Is one for the burglars, that daily raid your house, one for the government-takeover and one ...just for fun?

Oh no...I know: it is your right, to own as many guns as you like, right?!

But wait: I guess there are some, who have just one gun...that means, someone else must even have more than three!!!

...and I guess, if I said, "maybe we should limit the number of guns to 1 per household"...you will say.....

Some need a few guns to give to the kids remember.