H.r. 1022

J

junkpile

New member
So I'm sure you're all familiar with H.R. 1022.

My question is whether or not you think it will be enacted. It was introduced on February 13th, 2007, and referred to the Judiciary Committee. It was then referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on March 19th, 2007, where it sits now. As of today, it has 41 cosponsors.

I'm not exceptionally familiar with the timespan of bills such as this. If I understand it, it does not yet have a counterpart in the Senate. My question is this--what are the chances, in your objective opinion, that it will be "killed" in subcommittee or committee? I'm not sure the process of being "killed" in such a manner, though I assume it is just by not being brought up or resolved by the time congress adjourns.

So, my question is about the process, and how likely you think the process will work out in the bill's favor. 41 cosponors seems a lot, at 7% of the house, but maybe it's just a political stunt. Thoughts on the actual probability of it getting through?
 
In all honesty, probably a very small chance for a few reasons.

a. The NRA - extremely, extremely influential. If you want to maintain your position in congress, don't screw with the NRA unless you having backing of another, larger organization (only the AARP is more influential).

b. Politicians (liberal and conservative, Dem and Rep) know that a large part of their constituency is pro-gun, and that means votes. Sure, there are a lot of anti-gunners out there, but there are far fewer that actually go out and vote. Votes matter, so the politicians generally tend to side with either neutrality, or go back to the pro-gun rights in the end.

c. Presidential veto - in the event that it gets out of the Senate, which I doubt it will, the President can slap a fat VETO stamp on it. I could easily see this happening, and I hope, in the event of congressional passage, that it does.

So yeah. It's annoying and unsettling, but do I really see it happening? No, not really.
 
I heard she was taken to task on an interview recently. The reporter asked her what a barrel shroud was and she said she didn't know. Then he pulled out a big hammer and kept hitting her with it (figuratively of course), coming back repeatedly to the barrel shroud question. Does anyone have a link to the video or transcript?
 
1. NRA not so influential as we would like to think.

2. President will not veto this bill, he has already gone on record.

3. If not this year, next year.

I'm ashamed to see that we have not pushed hard enough for pro-gun legislation after VA. It has faded away, and now time for anti-gun again.
 
If Hillary wins and maintains a leftist Dem House and Senate, especially if the Democrat Party strengthens that infestation, then yes it will be passed. Then it will be followed by much, much, MUCH worse. If Hillary doesn't win...then we'll just have to wait and see.

My suggestion is, we have a couple years. Buy now, pay later.
 
I don't see it getting through anythime soon. The last time they tried this, the Republicans took control of congress. Gun control is one of the issues that helped defeat Al Gore back in 2000. Most politicians on both sides of the aisle know that, at least as of now, gun control is a losing issue. Yes, the usual suspects (Feinstein, Kennedy, Schumer, Pelosi, possibly Clinton and Obviously McCarthy) will support it and make a stink over it. But the majority of congressmen who are from less liberal districts will be too worried about re-election. C'mon, when Reid and Kennedy issue cautious comments and Hillary just keeps her mouth shut (if only she'd make a habit of that) right after something like VT I think it shows that they're leary of the issue.
 
"NRA not so influential as we would like to think."

Washington Post article excerpt:

"NRA Gets Credit on Hill

There are scores of interest groups out there, but which, really, gets their way in the halls of Congress?

According to a new poll, it's the National Rifle Association. A National Journal survey of more than 70 members of Congress suggests that the NRA is the "most effective" interest group on Capitol Hill. The organization received nearly twice as many votes -- 25 -- as AARP and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which tied for second place. Each received 13 votes.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business rounded out the lawmakers' top five. There were some differences between how lawmakers from the two parties responded to the poll. Republicans named the NFIB as the most effective group, followed by the NRA and the Chamber of Commerce. Democrats picked the NRA, followed by AARP and AIPAC."
 
That and I seriously doubt Hillary will get the democratic nomination - she is wayyyyyyyyy too polarizing within her own party. Obama? I would give him the nomination over Hillary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top