Fremmer:
In post #25 you appear to have quoted Brett Bellmore, who actually said the following.
To be blunt about it, if the bill was really that easy to defend, they wouldn't have felt the need to pass it anonymously. It's as simple as that. It really is.
As anyone who has followed the functioning of Congress closely enough to shed the nonsense they feed you in high school civics knows, voice votes in general have only two functions:
1. To allow members to lie to their constituents about how they voted.
And, far more often,
2. To hide the fact that the vote took place without the constitutionally mandated quorum present, meaning that the supposed 'law' wasn't actually legitimately enacted.
I'd guess that they scheduled the vote on this sucker without warning any opponents, to prevent any nasty floor fight over it, and as a result had to resort to a voice vote to hide the fact that there weren't enough members voting to have the right to enact diddly squat.
Meaning the law wasn't really passed in compliance with the Constitution, not that that scrap of parchment means anything anymore.
At least, that's the most reasonable conclusion whenever a controversial measure passes on a voice vote.
---------------------------
As to other aspects of the thing, such as protections offered to the aggrieved individual in/by this legislation, my own experiences with government in what were really minor money matters are less than encouraging, respecting the largess and or fair treatment that the individual might expect from the bureaucracy and or government agencies.
In one instance, involving the IRS, one year they asked a legitimate question about my tax return. I answered, in writing, keeping copies of all correspondence, which was sent certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested. They accepted my response, stating in writing that all was fine. Next year, the same question again, to which I again responded in writing, including copies of earlier correspondence. Didn’t help, and they threatened to audit my return. I advised them to go ahead. Mt wife went to speak with these clowns, asking why it seemed that they were either unable or unwilling to read their damned mail. The threatened audit was never had.
The PA Dep’t. Of Revenue (Income Tax) rather than issuing a requested refund, claimed that I owed additional monies. When a court ruling on a similar matter was cited, they ignored this, and continued dunning me. I requested a hearing in this matter stating that I wished to attend. Nothing was heard till I got a postal card from them which said in effect, “we had the hearing last week and you lost”. When I filed suit against the state, they folded their tent and snuck away, in the dead of night. Eventually I received two (2) refund checks, I cashed one, I had it coming. Seems that the idiots didn’t even realize that they had sent two (2).
I’m neither the brightest not the dumbest guy around but I can add and I am bad tempered. I can also recognizes when government is trying to screw me, as was here the case, and I will not put up with such foolishness, so long as I can fight it.
The foregoing were minor matters, of no great import other than to me, a matters of principle. I did what I could, which might be a lot more than some would or could do, and remember that all that was involved here were essentially nickels and dimes. Re the legislation above referenced, a whole lot more than nickels and dimes are involved.
As I said earlier, based on personal experience, neither the bureaucracy (government) nor the Congress is particularly trustworthy, sad to note. As for Gun Control itself, I’ve been fighting this battle, doing what I could, since the early to mid 1960’s, I know I’m old, don’t rub it in. Perhaps I should have long since thrown in the towel, perhaps I’m simply to damned dumb to so do.
In any event, I submit that this battle absolutely must be carried on, and that raising the question I originally attempted to raise, that of unusual procedure, respecting legislation that was quite far from NON-CONTRAVERSIAL is part of that battle.
If it turns out that you have more faith and or trust in government than I do, I do hope that you never suffer any major disappointments. For myself, I lean toward President Reagan’s Trust But Verify. Problem us, in this case, verification might take some years, during which time all manner of harm might be done to the civil rights of individuals. I expect that you would be less than happy seeing such outcomes.
Thanks for your time.
