Sen. Lee says fight against gun control likely won't include 'speaking filibuster'

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    April 13, 2013 2:06 p.m.

    Senator Lee represents our Constitutional Republic with it's guarantee of individual rights for all US citizens.

    Those who comment that he represents a fringe are in fact a fringe themselves representing the philosophy of the big-government/banking monopoly who want to take us back two hundred and 37 years to a time when the we were ruled by a monarchy in Europe.

  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    April 13, 2013 11:30 a.m.

    Just a thought.

    I wonder how much time and how many dollars it has cost the State of Utah to send it's numerous "message bills" to the Federal Government?

    Would you expect the Federal Government to send a message bill back to Utah?

    My opinion is our Senator Lee has been such a thorn in the side of the Federal Government that it is natural to have some push back from the Federal Government.

    I wonder how this push back will manifest it self?

  • DaveRL OGDEN, UT
    April 13, 2013 10:43 a.m.

    @ worf, well I'm a reloader so I don't have to buy tons of ammo, but in speaking to my local gun shop, yes there has been a run on ammo nation-wide, but it has been by paranoid gun owners and militia types who are creating the shortage.

    @ Redshirt I have a long line of law enforcement (federal, state, county) and military in my family so some still active. I hate to bust your bubble but yes Homeland security did buy all that ammo....they did a mass purchase for all Federal law enforcement offices nation-wide. Just simple economics large purchase better price, saving tax payer dollars.

  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    April 12, 2013 11:23 p.m.

    I would like Senator Lee to temper his actions and comments against the Obama administration.

    I understand it would be difficult to prove but I think their might be some retaliation in the form of program cuts to Utah and Federal facilities here in the state.

    The dramatic cut in funding for the Central Utah Project would be one example.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    April 11, 2013 5:23 p.m.

    Re: Melanna and Kalindra

    Either you two did not read my post or I really was not clear. I'm in favor of the fillabuster because it is done by elected officials who can protect the minority position. I hope it will work in this congress to stop as much of Obama/Reid/Pelosi as possible. I know that when Harry Reid becomes the minority leader he will also use it. That's fine with me. Keep the fillabuster. My point about judges is that only a few, sometimes only one, can make rulings that overturn the democratic process and with judges there is no accountability as there is with elected officials. Therefore if power to overrule the majority exists, if prefer it exist with people who can be accountable.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    April 11, 2013 9:07 a.m.

    To "JoeBlow" who cares who created the mess. The previous administration was lead by a Progressive, he just wasn't as bold of Progressive as what we have now. Does it really matter where the bad idea comes from?

    To "Tolstoy" again, why do they need 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition? How many TSA agents are armed?

    You keep dancing around the problem, and the issue.

  • I-am-I South Jordan, UT
    April 11, 2013 8:21 a.m.

    I actually have been really happy with Senator Lee. Obviously he's not perfect, but I like that he is a man of principle (at least in politics, I can't speak for his personal life) and he stands up and fights for those principles. Also, I'm still not sure why we are even having a gun debate. Things are exceptionally safe in most of the country. I also still have philosophical issues with the idea that people can tell me how, when, and where I am allowed to defend myself. If you think you have some sort of right, legal or philosophical, to tell people that you have some severe narcissism issues.

  • Wonder Provo, UT
    April 10, 2013 4:51 p.m.

    Let me guess....Rush Limbaugh is telling all his dittoheads that the gubment is after their ammo. I can always tell what he's preaching without ever listening to him. Well, maybe not Rush. Maybe Glenn or another one of the conspiracy gang. The government is buying bullets! Who knew that FBI agents, DEA agents, etc. needed ammo!

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 10, 2013 3:24 p.m.

    from the DHS website "The department is designed to absorb several federal agencies dealing with domestic defense, including the Coast Guard, the Border Patrol, the Customs Service, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Secret Service, and the Transportation Security Administration (which was created after September 11 to oversee airline security). Its responsibilities include exploring ways to respond to terror attacks and working to better coordinate intelligence about terrorist threats. The department is also expected to implement much of the National Strategy for Homeland Security." so their only job is to secure our borders and protect us from terrorist attacks across the globe, i cant imagine why they may need ammo for that it must be a conspiracy.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    April 10, 2013 3:27 p.m.

    Why doesn't John McCain just join his buddies like Harry Reid and become a Democrat? Geez - you can finally clearly see all the 'pretend conservatives' as they are finally unmasked. McCain needs to follow his fellow purple republicans like Bob Bennett into retirement. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and other conservatives are the only 'real' GOP members left standing. I would rather lose every election and stand as a true conservative than compromise with Satan and his progressive brethren.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 10, 2013 3:24 p.m.

    Yes Red. Another bureaucratic government redundant agency created by the GOP with complete congressional control.

    I seldom defend the Dems because I have said numerous times that they are big spenders and lovers of government. But I do point out the GOP is just as likely to do all the same things that you crow about daily on these boards.

    Just like Medicare Part D and NCLB. Can you imagine the maelstrom had Obama and the Dems championed those programs?

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 10, 2013 2:59 p.m.

    why don't you tell us you where all for the DHS until Obama came into office.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 10, 2013 2:13 p.m.

    To "Melanna" homeland security is not the department of defending our nation. That is the Military's job. Why does the DHS need all of those rounds? According to the DHS website, everything outside of border enforcement, they are just a go-between that gets the appropriate information to the right agency. So again, why do they need so much ammunition? If they have 1.6 billion rounds, why is it that the DHS says that they have an ammo shortage?

    You have failed to answer the simple question of, what do they need with that much ammo? That is enough for each border patrol agent to have 72,000 rounds.

    Again, since DHS's only responsibilities that they have where guns are needed is for immigration and border control, why so much ammo?

    If you say they are doing other things, then again, why the redundant intelligence/military agency?

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 10, 2013 2:08 p.m.

    "If all those who want this gun legislation could actually show how this will help stop what the proponents actually say it will do, please step up and show me some evidence."

    OK, have you noticed that many of the mass shootings are done with semi-automatic weapons?

    Why not Fully Automatic weapons?

    Isn't is likely that the reason is that they are not available for sale and have not been for a long long time?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 10, 2013 1:20 p.m.

    Salt Lake City, Utah
    did I log into some alternate universe? Did a conservative poster really just ask why the people charged with defending our country really need to buy so much ammo and insist we need to have a national conversation about why they are doing so?

    12:35 p.m. April 10, 2013


    Alternate universe -- Yes
    ..becasue SOME people insist the United States is their worst enemy,
    and Communist China is our best friend (i.e., whatever's good for the bottom line, business partner).

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    April 10, 2013 1:20 p.m.

    @mg scott
    So how exactly would the judicial be able to protect the rights of the minority of they could simply be voted out by the majority? Those activist judges maybe end up being your last line of defense if the filibuster fails and once again I suspect you will be singing a much different tune. As Tolstoy already stated above there is a logical reason our system is set up the way it is.

  • Melanna Salt Lake City, Utah
    April 10, 2013 1:05 p.m.

    @mg scott
    if the filibusterer fails those "bums" maybe the only thing left to protect your constitutional rights as is the case with those that are fighting back against prop 8. Being in the minority for a change can kind of change your prospective can't it?

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    April 10, 2013 12:54 p.m.

    If all those who want this gun legislation could actually show how this will help stop what the proponents actually say it will do, please step up and show me some evidence. The evidence of violence in the states that have the strictest gun laws does not hold up as a reason to support this legislation. In fact, the evidence is quite the contrary. Those states that are the safest have the most liberal gun laws. But, when citizens are driven by compulsion, rather than liberty, nothing can or ever will be said that could persuade that citizen otherwise.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    April 10, 2013 12:48 p.m.

    Re: Tolstoy

    You do have a good point. My only comment is that our system seems to have balances built into it that allow minority power so that the majority will not always overwhelm the minortiy. Look at what happened with Obamacare when the Democrats had supermajorities and passed it without any minority input. That being said, I think it is in the courts where this principle really applies, as in a hand full of judges can legislate to overturn the will of the majority of people. Prop 8 probably being the latest coming example. Sometimes minority power works for you and sometimes it doesn't. I'd rather have the fillabuster in the Senate than a few judges blocking the peoples vote. At least we can throw those bums out.

  • Melanna Salt Lake City, Utah
    April 10, 2013 12:35 p.m.

    did I log into some alternate universe? Did a conservative poster really just ask why the people charged with defending our country really need to buy so much ammo and insist we need to have a national conversation about why they are doing so?

  • UtahDemocrat Salt Lake City, UT
    April 10, 2013 12:26 p.m.

    If Mike Lee wants to stand for something, let him walk the talk. A threatened "nonspeaking" filibuster does nothing to move the debate forward, to protect the constitution, or to safeguard the general public. Have the courage of your convictions or step aside, Mr. Senator. If you have nothing to add to the conversation, Senator Lee, then vote "NO" on the bill and move on to issues you can talk about.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 10, 2013 12:20 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" I don't think you know anything about what you have written today.

    First of all the Government IS buying up a lot of ammunition. See Forbes "1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It's Time For A National Conversation". Why does Homeland Security need that many rounds.

    Second, when a person gets a short sale on a home, the only entity that has to eat the cost is the bank. If a bank loses money on a short sale, there are no reprocussions for anybody except their stock holders, and then that is very minor compared to when a bank has to forclose on a home.

    Nice rants, but once again factually lacking on your part.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 10, 2013 11:40 a.m.

    “I never rule out anything. But I don't anticipate, given the procedural posture we're in with this bill, the need to use a speaking filibuster.”

    "I'm a politician. I'm always prepared to speak at length, but I don't anticipate that's going to happen."

    Sen. Mike Lee


    Says the man who stopped making paymetns on his mortgage,
    and somehow negotiated a sweet deal short-sale on his mansion,
    sticking it to the rest of us who DO make our finacial obligations and live within our means.

    Perhaps he filibustered the bank holding his note?
    Just refused to agree on any terms until they finally just gave up?

    THAT says more about Mike Lee, than Mike Lee says about Mike Lee.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 10, 2013 11:27 a.m.

    Mcallen, TX
    DaveRL=gun rights are protection from government, not hunting. Have you tried buying ammo lately? Think government isn't trying to take away our guns?

    8:49 a.m. April 10, 2013


    Let me guess --
    another vast-right-wing conspiracy.

    The gv'mnt taken away dim dar bullets! hrumpf!

    Ever hear of supply and demand?
    Eco 101

    If you gun nuts weren't ALL out buying up as much ammo as you can get your hands on, hording up enough ammo to prepare for a ficticous armegeddeon that isn't real - there'd be plenty of ammo.

    You are a victim of your OWN making.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 10, 2013 11:04 a.m.

    Does anyone else remember the days not so long ago when republicans insisted on allowing simple up and down votes? Does anyone here really think those same people will have any insight into why we have a system in place that allows the minority in the senate to block certain legislation when the shoe is on the other foot?

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    April 10, 2013 11:02 a.m.

    It's amazing how well one can sleep at night when you have made a decision based on principles, which in this case is the Constitution.

    April 10, 2013 10:09 a.m.

    Hey Worf, I ask you this seeing how you bad mouth a lot of people and things on here. And just where is it stated under your 2 amendment rights that your a forded bullets? And if you feel the need to shoot then the cost of said bullets should not be a concern to you or any one else that shoots. And as another person stated on a different page people will get them no matter the cost and they compared it to crack heads wanting crack where there's away there's a will.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 10, 2013 9:58 a.m.

    ‘Sen. Lee says fight against gun control likely won't include 'speaking filibuster'’


    Let me guess...

    He floated a political balloon and it got popped,
    when he discoverd that 85% of Utahns favor, wanted and support back-ground checks?

    But he continues to pander to last reamining 15% of the extreme radical right-wing who keep thinking that because the Founding Fathers didn't bother to expound and specifically spell out each and every thing allowed or not allowed by the 2nd amendment
    [such as, banning weapons from children, criminals, and the mentally ill]
    because the writers of the Constitution assumed we'd be smart enough 230 years later to use our good own common sense and figure out that isn't such a good idea on our own?!


  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    April 10, 2013 9:16 a.m.

    I'd like to see the vote in the Senate just because there are some republican state Democrats who will be very reluctant to show their true colors with the vote. It will be interesting to see how Harry Reid trys to protect them. It might end up being Reid who does not want this vote, as it could cost him the majority in the 2014 election.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 10, 2013 8:49 a.m.

    DaveRL=gun rights are protection from government, not hunting. Have you tried buying ammo lately? Think government isn't trying to take away our guns?

  • HS Fan Salt Lake City, UT
    April 10, 2013 7:53 a.m.

    Hypocrites. That's what our politicans are. Senator Lee is a terrible Senator and a poor example of our State. Senator Bennett was a statesman who played an active role in our democracy. Senator Lee is far from that. He'll never get anything done and will continue to be isolated by others in D.C. because of his narrow, partisan views and tactics.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 10, 2013 6:31 a.m.

    "I don't understand it," McCain said on a Sunday morning talk show. "What are we afraid of?""

    They are afraid that they will be forced to take a vote that they know is against the wishes of the majority of Americans. (around 90% of Americans favor background checks)

    They they will have to explain why they voted the way they did.

    Filibuster = no votes.

    Its all about politics as the GOP can stop any bill from passing.

  • DaveRL OGDEN, UT
    April 10, 2013 5:43 a.m.

    I have been a hunter all my life, I don't use assault weapons to hunt and it never takes more than one bullet to get the job done - if it did I would spend more time at the shooting range. If I felt threaten at home my 12 gauge would be the first thing I would grab. Why anyone would be opposed to the measurements like background checks, assault weapon/high capacity magazine regulations is beyond common sense, that is unless you have something to hide. I have heard the argument of "taking our weapons away" but that is just a paranoid delusion, no one has said anything about taking guns away. What I want to know how many dead children will it take to satisfy Senator Lee and his supporters?

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 10, 2013 1:30 a.m.

    High taxes are destroying the economy, and peoples lives.

    Let Obama fly around with Air Force One, and campaign for "tax control".

  • Conner Johnson
    April 9, 2013 8:53 p.m.

    Sen. Lee— please don't make Utahns look like a bunch of idiots. How you sleep at night is beyond me.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 9, 2013 8:48 p.m.

    Sen. Lee- Please be prepared, and step up and speak for as long as it takes to halt any infringement on our rights, especially the deceptively named "universal background checks" which are nothing but a scheme to register every gun and gun owner which would do nothing to reduce crime, but is essential for eventual confiscation of privately owned guns.

    It is telling that Sen. Lee has principles and announces his positions, while our superannuated senior Senator Hatch plays his usual chameleon political role by pretending to "study" and then after sensing which way the polls are trending will announce his position. It is embarrassing when the new kid on the block is a better senator than one with 36 years seniority.

    In any case, Obama's gun ban schemes need to be stopped by whatever means necessary.

  • The Reader Layton, UT
    April 9, 2013 8:25 p.m.

    I certainly hope the senate and the house will vote on the gun bills. We, the public need to see our legislature working together to get something positive done.