If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Business Insider)   Gun Control background check passes 54-46. Oh wait, did we say pass? How is that filibuster reform working out for ya?   (businessinsider.com) divider line 877
    More: Followup, Senate, Mark Begich, human beings, filibusters, Dan Malloy, Heidi Heitkamp, Martin O'Malley, Max Baucus  
•       •       •

4118 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Apr 2013 at 4:40 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



877 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-17 04:41:58 PM
fireden.net
 
2013-04-17 04:42:27 PM
Only in America could a policy that 90% of the public supports get killed.
 
2013-04-17 04:42:44 PM
It'a a great day in America when the majority no longer rules, and a minority of small-minded terrorists get what they want.
 
2013-04-17 04:43:19 PM

Woman in Senate balcony shouts "shame on you!" after BG checks bill goes down.

- jennifer bendery (@jbendery) April 17, 2013

Sandy Hook parents were in the gallery, hoping that would matter. Wayne Lapierre wasn't, knowing it wouldn't.

- Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) April 17, 2013
 
2013-04-17 04:43:20 PM

dittybopper: [fireden.net image 596x329]


we know
 
2013-04-17 04:43:36 PM
If they wanted it to pass they should have come up with a snappy acronym that alluded to more freedoms for everyone and was the exact opposite of the intent of the bill.
 
2013-04-17 04:43:38 PM
Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?
 
2013-04-17 04:44:21 PM

dittybopper: [fireden.net image 596x329]


Not a big fan of representative democracy, are you?

Look, no one is going to take your goddamn guns.  They just want to make sure you aren't a psychopath.
 
2013-04-17 04:44:23 PM

CPennypacker: dittybopper: [fireden.net image 596x329]

we know


It's always the mentally ill who are the strongest supporters of owning guns with no limitations.
 
2013-04-17 04:44:29 PM
So the takeaway from this is that a little ricin works wonders on the legislative process.
 
2013-04-17 04:44:32 PM
fark you in 1.
 
2013-04-17 04:44:38 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


Because shut up, you evil Communist, that's why.
 
2013-04-17 04:44:46 PM
Remember anti-gun control advocates.

If we get to an even higher level of body counts for these random events like Aurora or Sandy Hook, eventually the country could reach a point where the most draconian of anti-gun measures actually passes.

Perhaps you should rethink your "No changes to gun laws ever unless they loosen restrictions" mantra.

This background checks thing was a minor change that could have placated many people for years to come, but no, can't do that.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:09 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


Because Jesus.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:12 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


Because of the UN Agenda 21 is a hidden attempt to confiscate guns and Future Hitler will use it to take over America and such as.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:16 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


Because 10% of the population doesn't want them.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:36 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


It hurts people's feelings.

/Seriously, that's the reason.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:38 PM
I thought that the initial bill had passed a filibuster (due to fourteen Republican Senators voting for cloture). The article itself states that the failed vote was for an amendment to the bill (which itself requires a 60-vote majority), and not to end a filibuster.

I would like to know how the amendment proposed to "expand" background checks beyond the expansion already mandated by the bill itself before I form an opinion on it. Unlike many extremists, I neither believe advocacy of improving regulation of firearm sales to be equivalent to confiscating all firearms nor do I believe opposing "assault weapons bans" to be tantamount to excusing the deaths of children.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:42 PM

dittybopper: [fireden.net image 596x329]



Yes... we'd hate for crazy people to not be able to buy guns.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:43 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


Because Socialism.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:54 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


Because the Tree of Liberty needs to be watered by the blood of schoolchildren, duh. It's the same as throwing children into a volcano to appease the volcano-god.
 
2013-04-17 04:45:56 PM
www.truthdig.com
 
2013-04-17 04:46:17 PM

kronicfeld: Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?

Because 10% of the population the gun manufacturing lobby doesn't want them.


FTFReality
 
2013-04-17 04:46:19 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


Perhaps we should run one on you next time you want to enjoy any of your constitutional rights.
 
2013-04-17 04:47:11 PM

netizencain: Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?

Perhaps we should run one on you next time you want to enjoy any of your constitutional rights.


ugh
 
2013-04-17 04:47:30 PM

CPennypacker: ugh


Clearly he's the real victim here.
 
2013-04-17 04:47:36 PM

Dimensio: I thought that the initial bill had passed a filibuster (due to fourteen Republican Senators voting for cloture).


Nope.  The gracious vote we got from Republicans was just to START debate on the bill.  Most of the GOP didn't even want the bill discussed on the floor.

Today's vote was to END debate.  It failed, meaning that the bill was defeated by filibuster.
 
2013-04-17 04:47:49 PM

netizencain: Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?

Perhaps we should run one on you next time you want to enjoy any of your constitutional rights.


A right that specifically is allowed to be "well regulated".
 
2013-04-17 04:48:02 PM
www.wcvb.com


fireden.net
 
2013-04-17 04:48:23 PM

Dimensio: I thought that the initial bill had passed a filibuster (due to fourteen Republican Senators voting for cloture). The article itself states that the failed vote was for an amendment to the bill (which itself requires a 60-vote majority), and not to end a filibuster.

I would like to know how the amendment proposed to "expand" background checks beyond the expansion already mandated by the bill itself before I form an opinion on it. Unlike many extremists, I neither believe advocacy of improving regulation of firearm sales to be equivalent to confiscating all firearms nor do I believe opposing "assault weapons bans" to be tantamount to excusing the deaths of children.


The original bill that was brought to the floor for debate had Senator Schumer's version of expanding background checks. If this amendment were accepted, it would strike Schumer's text and replace it with Manchin and Toomey's text. And since you can filibuster amendments to bills in the Senate, they had to call for cloture before taking an actual vote on the amendment. 54 votes is not enough to achieve cloture, so they cannot hold a vote on whether to accept the amendment.
 
2013-04-17 04:48:54 PM

netizencain: Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?

Perhaps we should run one on you next time you want to enjoy any of your constitutional rights.


"Keep and bear" is the right, not "buy."

They should fix this through commerce.
 
2013-04-17 04:48:57 PM

netizencain: Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?

Perhaps we should run one on you next time you want to enjoy any of your constitutional rights.


your constitutional rights aren't unrestricted. see: shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, etc.
 
2013-04-17 04:48:57 PM
Biden looks thrilled.

static3.businessinsider.com
 
2013-04-17 04:49:01 PM

Hollie Maea: Dimensio: I thought that the initial bill had passed a filibuster (due to fourteen Republican Senators voting for cloture).

Nope.  The gracious vote we got from Republicans was just to START debate on the bill.  Most of the GOP didn't even want the bill discussed on the floor.

Today's vote was to END debate.  It failed, meaning that the bill was defeated by filibuster.


For what reason, then, does the linked article claim the vote to have been for an "amendment"? What, exactly, was to be amended?
 
2013-04-17 04:49:54 PM

phyrkrakr:


That right there is some good cartoonery.
 
2013-04-17 04:49:56 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: netizencain: Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?

Perhaps we should run one on you next time you want to enjoy any of your constitutional rights.

"Keep and bear" is the right, not "buy." "sell."

They should fix this through commerce.


ftfm.
 
2013-04-17 04:50:08 PM
Don't just look at Newtown. Look at Aurora. Look at Tucson. Look at Virginia Tech. Look at countless other high-profile examples of mass shootings over the past decade or so. What is the common thread? These incidents were perpetrated by people who were farked in the head. And in some cases, it was well-known to both authorities and health care officials that these people were farked in the head.

Opponents of bringing back the assault weapons ban claimed that it wouldn't do any good, because the ban would not have prohibited most of the weapons used in these recent attacks. Okay, fine. Similar comments have been made about bans on high-capacity magazines. All right, whatever.

But surely a reasonable person can be forgiven for believing that we could come together and figure out a way to keep firearms out of the hands of criminally and violently insane people, right? More stringent background checks could have prevented some of these people from buying the weapons that they later used to kill scores of innocent people, right? Even the NRA and its current president have been supportive of this kind of legislation in years past. Surely we could have at least accomplished this, right?

No.

The United States Senate has this afternoon given decent Americans and their families a giant middle finger. And we should avail ourselves of the opportunity to give it right back to them when re-election time comes around.
 
2013-04-17 04:50:09 PM
Also, this bill banned ZERO weapons. There is no assault weapons ban. Any discussion about an AWB is a canard that distracts from the discussion as to why so many are against attempts to limit gun violence.

In this thread I am employing the Bush Doctrine - preemptive attacks on the Fark Militia's talking points.
 
2013-04-17 04:50:37 PM
tyranny of the minority. farking-A.
 
2013-04-17 04:50:43 PM
F*cking cowards
 
2013-04-17 04:50:53 PM
Oh, and...

SHAME.
 
2013-04-17 04:51:11 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: Also, this bill banned ZERO weapons. There is no assault weapons ban. Any discussion about an AWB is a canard that distracts from the discussion as to why so many are against attempts to limit gun violence.

In this thread I am employing the Bush Doctrine - preemptive attacks on the Fark Militia's talking points.


There was also no "federal registry of firearms" despite Ted Cruz's insistence it was one.
 
2013-04-17 04:51:12 PM

Dimensio: Hollie Maea: Dimensio: I thought that the initial bill had passed a filibuster (due to fourteen Republican Senators voting for cloture).

Nope.  The gracious vote we got from Republicans was just to START debate on the bill.  Most of the GOP didn't even want the bill discussed on the floor.

Today's vote was to END debate.  It failed, meaning that the bill was defeated by filibuster.

For what reason, then, does the linked article claim the vote to have been for an "amendment"? What, exactly, was to be amended?


The final "compromise" bill (Manchin-Toomey) was developed during the amendment process that was started when the bill was brought up for debate (with the vote that passed with 14 GOP).
 
2013-04-17 04:51:12 PM

Fart_Machine: Because of the UN Agenda 21 is a hidden attempt to confiscate guns


WTF is hidden about it? They've got a statue out front of a gun tied in a knot.
 
2013-04-17 04:51:24 PM

netizencain: Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?

Perhaps we should run one on you next time you want to enjoy any of your constitutional rights.


We already do that with voting rights. If you're an incarcerated felon, you can't vote period. If you've served your sentence as a felon, there are some states where you can't vote period. What is that if not a background check?
 
2013-04-17 04:51:39 PM

Hollie Maea: dittybopper: [fireden.net image 596x329]

Not a big fan of representative democracy, are you?

Look, no one is going to take your goddamn guns.  They just want to make sure you aren't a psychopath.


You are appealing to the reason of individuals who think Obama is a Kenyan born homosexual, dog eating communist. People who love the constitution so much they want to repeal the 14th amendment. (just to clarify thats the one that allows us citizens to vote in our senators as opposed to them being chosen by state legislatures) And my personal favorite the people who want to ban abortion and make contraceptives harder to acquire yet can't seem to quit wetting the bed over welfare mothers. Good luck.
 
2013-04-17 04:52:15 PM

Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?


Because a lot of gun nuts couldn't pass them.
 
2013-04-17 04:52:43 PM

meat0918: Uranus Is Huge!: Also, this bill banned ZERO weapons. There is no assault weapons ban. Any discussion about an AWB is a canard that distracts from the discussion as to why so many are against attempts to limit gun violence.

In this thread I am employing the Bush Doctrine - preemptive attacks on the Fark Militia's talking points.

There was also no "federal registry of firearms" despite Ted Cruz's insistence it was one.


I would bet that Visa/MC/Amex already have a pretty good registry of firearms owners.
 
2013-04-17 04:52:58 PM

netizencain: Arachnophobe: Can someone explain to me why background checks are such a bad thing?

Perhaps we should run one on you next time you want to enjoy any of your constitutional rights.



Like showing papers in order to vote?
 
2013-04-17 04:53:05 PM

Hollie Maea: Dimensio: Hollie Maea: Dimensio: I thought that the initial bill had passed a filibuster (due to fourteen Republican Senators voting for cloture).

Nope.  The gracious vote we got from Republicans was just to START debate on the bill.  Most of the GOP didn't even want the bill discussed on the floor.

Today's vote was to END debate.  It failed, meaning that the bill was defeated by filibuster.

For what reason, then, does the linked article claim the vote to have been for an "amendment"? What, exactly, was to be amended?

The final "compromise" bill (Manchin-Toomey) was developed during the amendment process that was started when the bill was brought up for debate (with the vote that passed with 14 GOP).


Note that there were other options developed during the amendment process (such as Cruz-Grassley) but the one that was just filibustered was the only one that had a chance of passing (except that it didn't).
 
Displayed 50 of 877 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report