Sen. Reid Proposes Sandy Hook Legislation

I am pretty sure Harry got tired of them and Obama jawing about it and said if you want it up for a vote lets do it....If you don't like what happens after that talk to the hand.

It will be time to see who are our friends and who is not. The 900 lb gorilla will be making calls.

Harry voted against extending the last AWB
 
Moby: That looks like the same old video from right after the shooting so I'm not sure what you think it proves.

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2
 
Moby, your video is from December 15th... Remind me, what day was the shooting? I see that others have noted what I noted.

I really wish you conspiracy types would proofread your own documentation!
 
While not the text of the bill itself, I did find what appears to be the transcript of Reid introducing it.

(1) support the efforts of the President of the United States to reduce violence in the United States;

(2) promote common-sense proposals for preventing gun violence;

(3) provide law enforcement officers with the tools necessary to combat violent crime and protect communities, and protect themselves;

(4) ensure children can attend school free from the threat of violence;

(5) support States and local districts to ensure schools have the safe and successful learning conditions in which all students can excel;

(6) provide tools for identifying individuals that pose a threat to themselves or others, so they can receive appropriate assistance;

(7) keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of criminals and individuals who are not lawfully authorized to possess them;

(8) promote information-sharing that will facilitate the early identification of threats to public safety;

(9) mitigate the effects of violence by promoting preparedness;

(10) provide training for educational professionals, health providers, and others to recognize indicators of the potential for violent behavior;

(11) examine whether there is a connection between violent media and violent behavior;

(12) enable the collection, study, and publication of relevant research; and

(13) expand access to mental health services, with a focus on children and young adults.
Click to expand...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r113:2:./temp/~r113kR1k6d:e0:

Points 1, 2, and 7 could be troubling depending on their specifics, but they could also be nothing more than vague political maneuvering too. The lack of anything specifically on gun control may actually be a good sign given Reid's background on the issue and that he seems to be much more specific in his proposals on mental health and violent media. Of course, we'll have to wait for the actual text of the bill to know for sure.
 
Soooo...that's basically the contents of the President's executive orders, but made redundant via legislation?

I think Mr. Reid is just treading water because folks expect him to swim.
 
That doesn't sound like new laws but just support of generalities.

There are specific bills out there like Lautenberg's ban on more than 10 cap mags.

If Reid supports those - that will be an indicator. It will be hard for him as he doesn't want to lose the Senate. It was dicey that they kept it this time - not to be too political but crazy candidates sunk the GOP retaking the Senate.
 
Harry voted against extending the last AWB
Click to expand...

He voted against the original AWB as well, though once that vote was on the record and the amendment passed anyway, he was one of two yes votes that passed cloture and prevented some other amendments that could have killed the original AWB.
 
Boy, "common-sense" is a subjective term isn't it?
Reid is a savvy politician, and I can't disagree with any of the posted points at face value, but it will certainly be interesting to see how he feels his goals should be attained.

I honestly hope that they split some of this stuff up.
Some of the things being suggested I actually agree pretty strongly with - streamlining the process for identifying/reporting the dangerously mentally disturbed, better information sharing, and expanding access to mental health services for instance.
Some of the suggestions I can live with - like universal background checks.
Some of them I am adamantly opposed to - bans for law abiding citizens, and federal registration.

I just wish we could decide on them on a point by point basis as apposed to having to go all or nothing. But sadly we're a nation governed by the moralistic equivalent of a bunch of flea market salesmen.
 
Before anyone gets complacent about this, I would remind you that Reid said the bill would be open on the floor for amendments.

Do you understand that literally anything can get attached to this bill? I would suggest that we maintain a careful watch on this.
 
As Al said, Reid's bill is eventually the one to watch.

Reid's bill is a shell that covers everything on Obama's wish list. Other bills addressing specific topics can be attached as amendments to Reid's bill and then the whole thing can be amended during floor debate just before a final vote. Reid's bill will be passed because it will be the container for the no-brainer topics such as mental health, training, preparedness, etc. The real question is whether -or what- controversial stuff will slip into the bill.

Just as a point of reference, Feinstein's 1994 AWB bill was inserted as an amendment into Biden's omnibus crime bill, which was itself passed as an amendment in the form of a substitute for a previously passed House bill.
 
Last edited:
Reid's bill is a shell that covers everything on Obama's wish list. Other bills addressing specific topics can be attached as amendments to Reid's bill and then the whole thing can be amended during floor debate just before a final vote. Reid's bill will be passed because it will be the container for the no-brainer topics such as mental health, training, preparedness, etc. The real question is whether -or what- controversial stuff will slip into the bill.
Click to expand...

Lautenberg has four such bills.

1. S.22 : A bill to establish background check procedures for gun shows.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] (introduced 1/22/2013) Cosponsors (15)

2. S.33 : A bill to prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] (introduced 1/22/2013) Cosponsors (17)

3. S.34 : A bill to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to known or suspected dangerous terrorists.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] (introduced 1/22/2013) Cosponsors (10)

4. S.35 : A bill to require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] (introduced 1/22/2013) Cosponsors (6)

Feinstein has one also:

S.150
Latest Title: A bill to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] (introduced 1/24/2013) Cosponsors (17)
 
Before anyone gets complacent about this, I would remind you that Reid said the bill would be open on the floor for amendments.

Do you understand that literally anything can get attached to this bill? I would suggest that we maintain a careful watch on this.
Click to expand...

While I don't necessarily disagree with you, could not the same be said of any bill open to amendments? It seems to me that if they really wanted to push gun control, adding those amendments to an unrelated bill (such as a budget bill) would be a shrewder way to go about it. Also, adding amendments is a double edged sword. For example, if an AWB amendment was added, someone from the other side of the aisle could add an amendment for nationwide CC or a repeal of the NFA as a "poison pill" could they not?
 
I am shocked to see someone from both WV and OH on that list, I always thought of both of those states as very Pro 2a; though I know through my brother in law you have anti enclaves in Ohio like Cleveland and Cincinnati
Click to expand...

Sherodd Brown is a Dem and has always been anti-2A. I wrote him and a got a BS reply.
 
While I don't necessarily disagree with you, could not the same be said of any bill open to amendments?
Click to expand...

The amendments offered have to be relevant to the bill being offered. Typically, that is interpreted broadly anyway; but as you can see from the language above, the Reid bill offers a lot of opportunities given the vague language and number of subjects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top