search
top

Reid Confident on Gun Control Deal

The Washington Times is reporting. Reid noted in a conference about the Zika virus that, “I think we’ve taken a bite out of the NRA. I think they’ve done enough damage.” The threat is still from the bill the squishy Republican are getting behind, essentially the “no-fly, no-buy.”

The measure by Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican, attracted 52 votes of support in a procedural vote last week, yet it fell short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a potential filibuster and advance, leaving the effort in limbo.

That doesn’t seem to fit Reid’s optimism. 52 is a good bit shy of 60. But we shouldn’t get cocky.

13 Responses to “Reid Confident on Gun Control Deal”

  1. Yeah, I see Patrick Henry beat me to it. The house is stuffing the gun measure into a homeland-security “antiterrorism” bill. That will offer cover for the Senators by putting the whole mess into a smoke-and-mirrors package rather than a straight-up vote on gun control. This looks bad. Haven’t figured out yet where the best place to fight it is. If we can strip the gun control out in the House that would be ideal.

    We need to figure out where we can split out the gun control part of this and stop that. I don’t think we can stop an “antiterrorism” omnibus bill, especially if it comes to the Senate with gun control already in place.

    • Publius says:

      You say “antiterrorism” but I hear “bye-bye, Bill of Rights.” It was only a matter of time until they got to the 2A on this one.

  2. Dave says:

    and still… no reciprocity vote, not even out of committee … again. Still.

    Honestly, I suspect the republicans have been given the ok by Fairfax to get 1 or more gun control bills in front of Obama to sign.

  3. stephana says:

    We have to make the reciprocity point moot. We can do it on the local level and the feds would not have a say. We did it in ohio, the AG made it so ohio recognizes any states ccw, no pacts needed. If all the states would do this we would have full reciprocity without the feds.

    • Dave says:

      That’s not living in reality. If the dog hadn’t have stopped to poop, he would’ve caught the rabbit !

      Yes, Ohio may have done it, but states like NY, NJ, MA, CT, HI, MD, CA, OR, DC – never will. Not ever.

      Seriously, NRA-ILA drops the Nat’l reciprocity bill into the hopper every year to mollify members, then spends exactly zero dollars to advance the bills. Then at the end of the congressional session they talk up their “wins” and how they’re just a few votes from passing reciprocity.

      Now we have this…

    • Roger Wilson says:

      Quite few states will never allow full reciprocity on their own. Heck, NYS doesn’t allow any reciprocity for other states.

      • Bill Twist says:

        They will if they are forced to by federal law. They’ll *HAVE* to. When that happens, it will eat away at their discriminatory pistol permit law. At the very least, it will apply pressure to the local licensing authorities to make pistol permits “unrestricted”, which essentially means it’s a CCW permit in addition to an ownership permit.

        • Ian Argent says:

          Congress could force shall issue; they did with LEOSA, and that was prior to Heller and McDonald.

          That having been said, doing so without first laying more foundation would be risky. Forcing reciprocity is a first step.

  4. Chas says:

    There is no argument against taking away guns from someone who already has guns if that person is on a “no-buy” list. Anyone not allowed to buy a gun cannot be allowed to have one, since the purpose of the “no-buy” list is to prevent the person from having a gun in the first place.
    If they can put us on a “no-buy” list, that list will immediately become a “no-have” list too, and we won’t have a leg to stand on to argue against it. It makes no sense at all to allow anyone who can’t legally buy a gun to legally have one anyway, and if we argue otherwise they’ll say we’re nuts. They are nuts for trying to rape our rights with no due process. Anyone who has not even been charged with a crime should not lose any constitutional rights. They are being very coy about this being just being a “no-buy” list, but if they put you on it, and there’s a record of you already owning guns, expect a midnight visit from your state SWAT team, Mr. Terrorist.
    They mean to put as many ordinary Americans as possible on such a list, while continuing to protect Muslims from being put on such a list. They mean to prove their claim that “right-wingers” are the worst terrorist threat, and that Muslims are not as much of a problem, so guess who they’re going to put on the list? You and me.
    This “no-buy” business is a legislative atrocity that has absolutely nothing to do with recent terrorist attacks, and everything to do with disarming ordinary Americans, which has been their goal for decades.

  5. Beatbox says:

    If only there was a way to make Reid more sympathetic to gun rights….

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. House to vote on gun control - […] provision to prevent suspected terrorists from purchasing guns, according to a source on the call. Reid is still confident…
  2. SayUncle » Congress on gun bills - […] Reid is confident there will be a gun control deal. Reid is likely still butthurt about NRA not endorsing…
top