Quantcast
U.S. & World

Top Senate Dems face decisions on gun curb push

Comments

Return To Article
  • oatka CLEARFIELD, UT
    April 10, 2013 11:07 a.m.

    Senator Harry Reid has introduced Senate Bill 649 under the Orwellian title of the “Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013.”

    Under some of its provisions, you would be committing a federal felony if you:

    1) Leave town for more than 7 days, and leave someone else at home with your firearms;
    2) Lend a firearm to a friend to take shooting or to go hunting;
    3) Loan a firearm to a family member if they live at a different residence;
    4) Hand a firearm to someone at a gun club which is not a shooting range;
    5) Teach someone to shoot on your own land, if you hand them the firearm; or
    6) Fail to report a firearm as lost or stolen within 24 hours.

    There are five levels of federal felonies, with the least imposing a penalty of one to five years.

    I direct this to those who are neither pro- or anti-gun, but think that “common sense” gun laws are needed. Do you believe any of the above would make the environment safer or deter crime? Does it not become apparent that the real aim is to deter/eliminate gun ownership?

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    April 10, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    The President is putting some of those elected officials into a bind with this bill which impacts on the second amendment in minds and souls of people. The President promised that people would save $2500 on health care and wouldn't cost them a dime more. Those individuals up for an election in 2014 have almost rolled into their campaign time and people will have time to see an impact on this by then. Pelosi and Reid have the task of ensuring superiority and the President just can't get away from campaigning. He loves that but not governing as he should. He is good at snippets but not policy and a real legacy. He is good at publicity and not at staying at home in the White House and being a diplomat. He believes in being a "star" but can't play the saxophone but can go to the late night shows being a "comedian".

  • Paul in MD Montgomery Village, MD
    April 10, 2013 7:47 a.m.

    Yes, Obama flew folks from Newtown to Capitol Hill to testify and lobby. Funny, they were all folks who agree with him. The family members who think we have tough enough gun laws weren't invited.

    Maybe the filibuster is used too often, I don't know. But how often has Harry Reid kept bills and amendments he doesn't like from ever seeing the light of day? By himself? Heard anything from the media about how unfair and terrible THAT is? Me neither.

    Too much of the "debate" about the 2nd amendment is far off base from what the Framers intended. Read the amendment. It's about guaranteeing the civilian population the ability to keep the government from falling into the same despotic forms as the governments they and their families had fled in coming to the New Land. Many despots in history started their rule by finding out who had weapons, then convincing the people they didn't need them anymore and disarming the civilians. Sorry, I'm not buying it.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 10, 2013 1:32 a.m.

    No decision, or debate about it. The second amendment spells it out.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 9, 2013 7:22 p.m.

    @Redshirt
    " If you were to take all guns away from every non-military or law enforcement person in the US, how does that help fix the mental health issues that lead people to commit mass murder?
    "

    We can pass another bill about mental health though every time Democrats work on something related to healthcare Republicans call it either socialism or just another big spending program so... I'm not getting my hopes up that anything can be done on that front.

    @the truth
    "We already have background checks,
    "

    No, not for ALL gun purchases we don't.

  • oatka CLEARFIELD, UT
    April 9, 2013 5:38 p.m.

    "The least Republicans owe the parents of those 20 little babies who were murdered at Sandy Hook is a thoughtful debate about whether stronger laws could have saved their little girls and boys," Reid said.
    There will be no "thoughtful debate" with these people. They wallow in the blood of innocents after every tragedy, pushing their anti-gun agenda - none of which would have prevented or will prevent these shootings.

    These despicable people use these murdered children as a generator of emotions so that people won't look too closely at their bills. They remind me of the stereotypical witch doctor in those old black and white movies, shaking the bodies of those unfortunates at the people in an attempt to con them into following their wishes.

    The 1968 Gun Control Act SPECIFICALLY exempted private sales as even then it was widely recognized that the background check data keeping could easily morph into a registration/confiscation scheme. The ink was barely dry before the liberals began screaming "loophole!" and have been pushing ever since for it's expansion.
    What good is a Constitutional right when you have to get the government's permission to exercise it?

  • louie Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 9, 2013 5:02 p.m.

    to Red Shirt

    We also have the best Military in world. How did that happen? Was it government or was it a "for profit organization". Unfortunately our current health care system excludes so many people whol avoid care because of costs. The preventative care is what is lacking.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    April 9, 2013 4:48 p.m.

    @Atl134

    NO one is making it easier to buy a gun.

    But the right IS a constitutional right.

    Pain and simple.

    We already have background checks,

    and have tens of thousands of gun laws on the books acrros the land,

    NOne of whihch has had stopped a single the bad guy

    so how will stopping the good guys fix the probelms?

    We never had all these probems in the past with much more easier accesss to guns,

    Clearly, the problem is something else.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 9, 2013 4:42 p.m.

    To "atl134" you still have not anwered the questions. If you were to take all guns away from every non-military or law enforcement person in the US, how does that help fix the mental health issues that lead people to commit mass murder?

    All you have done is disarm the people, the mentally ill are still mentally ill. Your ilk claims to want to help people, but their recent gun control push does nothing to help people and only suppresses Constitutional rights.

  • bleeding purple Santa Ana, CA
    April 9, 2013 4:31 p.m.

    The only reason Obama is focusing on gun control is because he doesn't want anyone to talk about the sinking economy! Let's get people working and then worry about it ... no one can afford a gun anyway!

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 9, 2013 3:46 p.m.

    To "louie" if Obamacare results in care similar to other countries around the world, we will end up killing more people. One data point can be seen in Canada. Because of their rationing system, people have to wait for cardiac surgeries. Because of the wait times imposed by the government, they have a well established mortality rate that is higher than the US for similar heart conditions.

    If you want to look at cancer survival rates, the US has the best survival rates for most cancers. Now, if the government starts to ration that treatment how many more people will die because the government couldn't afford to give everybody everything?

    The facts show that when it comes to disease, the US can react faster than any other nation (according to WHO). What do you think will happen when we are reduced to the reaction times found around the world?

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 9, 2013 3:43 p.m.

    @Redshirt
    "how does removing guns or making guns harder to purchase do anything for the mental health issues that any of the murderers have?"

    By making it harder for people with mental health issues to purchase guns?

    @Mountanman
    "Do you really believe criminals will fall in line and obey more gun control laws when they don't obey any laws, that's why they are criminals? "

    So we should facilitate their crimes by making it extremely easy to buy a gun?

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 9, 2013 2:25 p.m.

    @ Louie. Do you really believe criminals will fall in line and obey more gun control laws when they don't obey any laws, that's why they are criminals? This is not about keep you people safe, it about power and control.

  • Bored to the point of THIS! Ogden, UT
    April 9, 2013 2:15 p.m.

    re lost in dc

    really?

  • HS Fan Salt Lake City, UT
    April 9, 2013 2:13 p.m.

    Mike Lee is a bad person.

  • louie Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 9, 2013 2:08 p.m.

    @1conservative

    I got news for you. Obamacare will, in all probability, save more lives. Failure to implement more gun controls will continue to put more and more lives at risk. Which side of this debate do you really want to be on.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    April 9, 2013 1:55 p.m.

    Doesn't anyone remember what happened last time we shoved a bill through? Remember Nancy Pelosi's official explanation on what the bill will do, "We have to pass the bill, to find out what's in it"

    That's exactly what the Dems are doing now. Just pass the bill with all of their pork, the republcian pork and other pork. And find out two years from now that we have new taxes, tax increases, more spending and a bill that did nothing to protect one little child.

    If they were serious about saving even one childs life, as barack claims. Then why not get rid of all of the swimming pools and open bodies of water? If we can save one life as biden has repeated then it's worth it. Because there isn't a deep pocket for that yet. Once there is a deep pocket you have every loser which includes politicians and occupy nut cases at the door wanting their "fair" share.

  • ThornBirds St.George, Utah
    April 9, 2013 1:51 p.m.

    Come on now...
    The truth?
    It is very simple.
    This is all about MONEY.
    Legislators want money coming in from the NRA for their campaigns.
    NRA wants to keep money rushing in to them from the manufacturers of deadly weapons, who are beholden to them.
    Kind of makes one feel nauseated, doesn't it?
    Now, again, how many human beings die each year as a result of being shot by gun?

  • 1conservative WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 9, 2013 12:47 p.m.

    Its interesting that some of the Obama followers are NOW disgusted at the Repubs. using parliamentary tactics to stop non-sensical gun regulations; but were just fine using parliamentary procedures to ram through Obamacare.

    I wonder if Obama will make any sweet deals with demo or Repub. holdouts like he did with Obamacare?
    Cornhusker kickback?, louisiana purchase? etc....

    Send some federal contracts to the states that comply with his wishes??

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 9, 2013 12:24 p.m.

    To "dave4197" how does removing guns or making guns harder to purchase do anything for the mental health issues that any of the murderers have?

    If your car gets a flat tire, do you change out the air freshener. That is what Congress is wanting to do with their gun control laws. Yes they can say they did something, but what they did does not solve the problem.

    If you look at most every mass murderer, they have a history of mental illness that is not being addressed at all by the politicians.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    April 9, 2013 11:16 a.m.

    Did BO use campaign funds or taxpayer money to ferry those 11 relatives to DC on Airforce 1?

    "The least Republicans owe the parents of those 20 little babies who were murdered at Sandy Hook is a thoughtful debate about whether stronger laws could have saved their little girls and boys," Reid said.

    reid using “those 20 little babies” as a political prop is disgusting. But I am not surprised reid would stoop that low. Nothing appears to be beneath him. And NONE of the laws he is proposing would have stopped Sandy Hook. Why does he not feel as strongly for the millions of babies aborted in this country each year?

    I am GLAD to have a senator who cares enough about our constitutional rights to work to prevent dems and other libs from infringing on them

  • dave4197 Redding, CA
    April 9, 2013 10:32 a.m.

    Please (sen) Mike Lee, stop your filibuster plans. The Senate should vote on this bill, and other bills before it. The Senate should end the filibuster as a blockage and just have a full debate and let the votes be made, tally them up and learn which side won, that would be closer to democracy than your endless talking about your position. Enough already, of you (sen) Lee!

    There's no problem constitutionally or otherwise with background checks for potential gun owners. This is a public safety matter and ferreting out lawbreakers and mentally ill and unstable people from owning guns is not any infringement. Stop your ridiculousness (sen) Lee.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    April 9, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    If Mike Lee filibusters this bill he should be run out of the Senate at the next election and never again me nominated for anything. His political career should stop.