Boxer's "Common Sense" Concealed Carry Law

Status
Not open for further replies.
These bills are no great surprise. Politicians tend to get itchy to take action, especially when something like this happens to one of their own.
 
I actually think ncpatriot was referring to those antis who come up with these schemes.

As for schemes, I can't help but believe that Boxer wrote this thing with the intent that it fail. I believe the federal government clearly lacks jurisdiction on this matter. She knows that. But give it a catchy name, write it so that it fails on its face, blame anyone that opposes it even on constituional grounds, and suddenly you have more ammunition for your anti-gun rants.

"In 2011 I proposed legistation for 'common sense' concealed carry laws, and they opposed it! The bastards!" she will be heard screaching.
 
The Dems gun control policy---nibble, nibble, nibble, nibble.

Two steps forward and an occasional step backward. Lately more back than forward.

Tuscon and a dozen incidents before has many citizens thinking why we dont have more carriers, carrying in MORE places. Homeland security...
 
I just checked Barbra Boxer's web site. No mention of the bill. Looks like she has decided not to introduce the bill.
 
Well, first of all, "Barbara Boxer" and "common sense" are two phrases that don't belong in the same sentence anyway. It looks like Boxer wants nation-wide "may issue" which I find extremely unlikely. "May issue" is dying a slow death with states gradually moving to "shall issue". Also, it is doubtful that "may issue" would stand up to a SCOTUS challenge as the current court doesn't seem to be overly friendly to purely discretionary laws.

Where are all the folks here who were claiming a month ago that gun control was off the Dems' agenda ? Where'd they all go ?

It still isn't on the agenda of the party at large. As has been said, you've got the usual suspects like Boxer, Feinstein, Schumer, McCarthy, Dailey, and Bloomberg that will push for gun control, regardless of whether they're getting anywhere or not, for as long as they're in office. These people are in the minority within the party though as they're from very liberal districts that generally support gun control, Democrats from more conservative areas such as most of the Midwest, South, and West aren't willing to go along with the Boxers and Feinsteins because unlike the usual suspects, doing so will very likely cost them re-election.
 
Al, thanks for your work - I can't afford a PACER account, and appreciate your time and efforts.
Boxer forever lost any respect when she identified a barrel shroud as "the shoulder thing that goes up." She has no clue of what she does, and her handlers are clumsy.
AZ would quite possibly do the same thing we did with Real ID and Obamacare - pass a law that made any fed agent enforcing this law in our borders subject to arrest and prosecution. Before you poo poo the idea, ask yourself one question...where IS RealID?
 
It's easier to whine though, yes?

I don’t think I was whining about anything. Recently I’ve seen posts from apparently left-leaning posters implying that since the Dems weren’t talking about gun control that they weren’t thinking about gun control. My rebuttal was to check their past voting records to know what they’re thinking about. I was trying to be vigilant against those posters who might try and lull us.

I wasn’t complaining about any work that is being done on our behalf by you or others here. Sorry if it came out that way.

So how about the both of you getting a PACER account to help track all the civil rights cases I, and a very few others, are tracking and reporting upon. It will only take your time and a couple of hundred dollars every quarter to do this.

As it stands, there are only 3 or 4 of us, nationwide, that are doing all of this for you folks. It would cost all of us less, and take all of us less time, if more of you would do this to help out.

Could you explain how this works and what you are doing? It sounds like you are searching congressional records to ... monitor for attempts to slip in gun control legislation ? I'm not familiar with this.
 
Problem is that too many folks buy into all the hype and trash that they get in e-mails and read on the web. Then they yell "WOLF" to the top of their lungs without vetting anything.

i've been tracking proposed federal gun control legislation since the late 1960s. When a proposal like the Blair Holt thing sits for many months with no co-sponsors that should tell you something: It ain't going anywhere, just like the proposed magazine restrictions ain't going anywhere.

For years i went to breakfast with the same crowd. They were a pretty level headed group until the new administration came to power. About 10 days into the new administration; one guy claimed that the US congress had passed a new AWB and it was on Obama's desk for signature. Trying to reason with the guy and the rest of the breakfast klatch was an exercise in futility so i just quit associating with them.
 
Boxer is a radical do nothing. I don't know how true this is but when Fiorina was running against her she said that Boxer has only had 2 or 3 bills passed in the Senate - and they were all for pointless things.

Like said earlier, its just so she can say - "look what I tried to do, but big corporations stopped progress." (as if there is such a thing as a "Big" gun company compared to tobacco, oil, etc.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top