Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 5/14/2003 10:12:20 AM EDT
[url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/05/14/MN123026.DTL] I don't like the sound of this[/url] "Senators may filibuster gun bill. Proposal exempts manufacturers from lawsuits Washington -- Democratic senators, including the two from California, threatened Tuesday to use a filibuster to block legislation that would exempt gun manufacturers from lawsuits brought by shooting victims. The move by the Democrats came the same day the powerful House Majority Leader, Tom DeLay of Texas, said Republicans would bottle up an effort to renew the assault weapons ban passed a decade ago despite President Bush's support for extending the ban". Would it surprise anyone if some sort of deal is in the works between the NRA, the gun-grabbers and Congress? As in..."You gives us the votes (or no filibuster) for the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act", and we'll give you the Senate version of the AW ban". Perhaps even getting Bush to publicly state that he supports the senate version? (Everyone knows the House version is a red herring anyways). Even going so far as to dropping the ban on imported hi-cap magazines language; which Bush can later ban by signing an Executive Order. It's not like the NRA hasn't compromised before. The legislation to stop lawsuits against the firearms industry is their number 1 priority. the AW ban is the gun-grabbers number 1 priority. Both sides can claim a victory and say that was the best outcome they could get. Whom are bigger contributors to the NRA? Manufactures and the hunting crowd, or AW owners? Expect the worst and hope for the best...
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 10:17:44 AM EDT
I seriously doubt it.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 10:33:03 AM EDT
I hope you're wrong, but nothing would surprize me where democrats and republicans are concerned.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 11:12:23 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LoginName: Whom are bigger contributors to the NRA? Manufactures and the hunting crowd, or AW owners?
View Quote
Scary.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 11:32:27 AM EDT
This is my biggest concern... In negotiation, you always start out requesting more than you know you can get. The Democraps have come out and asked for practically everything. They know they cannot get that. So instead, they will settle for a renewal of what is currently on the books. The NRA and the Republicans have demonstrated their lack of backbone in the past. What assurance do we have that their will not be a last minute 'compromise'?
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 11:54:37 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 12:29:23 PM EDT
I think the Republicans would let the gunmakers protection bill die before they would compromise on a new AWB. Besides, I think they can muster enough votes to override a fillibuster.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 1:31:12 PM EDT
it's going to be an interesting 1.5 years
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 1:56:35 PM EDT
I say we start writing them and say "NO DEAL!"
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:01:34 PM EDT
more linkage [url]http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030513/hl_nm/congress_guncontrol_dc_1[/url]
By Todd Zwillich WASHINGTON (Reuters Health) - Senators opposed to a congressional measure granting gun manufacturers and dealers immunity from some civil liability lawsuits said Tuesday that they would try to use the coming debate on the bill to strengthen gun control laws in other areas. The bill, strongly favored by the National Rifle Association and other pro-gun rights groups, is expected to arrive on the Senate floor for a vote within the next few weeks. It seeks to prevent victims of violent gun crimes from suing gun manufacturers or dealers whom they accuse of negligently selling or distributing firearms to the perpetrators. The bill has the support of at least 55 senators, making it likely that it will pass when it comes up for a vote. Democrats said Tuesday that they will try to use the bill's wide support to enact gun-safety measures and restrictions favored by gun-control groups. Several Democrats said that they would offer an amendment closing a loophole in federal law that allows buyers at gun shows to bypass federally-mandated background checks before making a purchase. Bill opponents are also likely to push amendments requiring trigger locks on all handguns and a measure allowing for stricter federal inspections of gun manufacturers and dealers, they said. Gun-control advocates frequently make an example of Maryland resident Denise Johnson, the wife of a man killed in the Washington-area sniper attacks last fall. Johnson has filed a lawsuit naming the company that manufactured the rifle allegedly used in the attacks as well as the shop in Tacoma, Washington, where accused sniper Lee Malvo illegally obtained the gun. The Senate measure, which has already passed the House, would throw the case and similar ones out of court. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said that he would offer legislation that would bar immunity for gun shops that consistently violate laws governing gun sales. Despite the bill's wide support, including the endorsement of at least nine Democrats, opponents repeated Tuesday a threat to mount a filibuster against the bill. Such an effort would require the support of 41 senators to indefinitely prolong debate and kill the bill. "We are preparing for the possibility of a filibuster," said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I. Senate Republican leaders said that they were nearing the 60 votes necessary to prevent a filibuster, nearly guaranteeing the bill's passage. Fifty-three senators have already pledged support for the bill, while two previously undecided senators indicated in interviews that they would vote for it. "We're very close" to a filibuster-proof 60 votes, said Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, the bill's main sponsor.
View Quote
Looks like the dems big gun control plot is starting to emerge...
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:12:14 PM EDT
If the assault weapon bill gets passed again chance are it will be WAY more restrictive. If that happened it would put the companys that make AR-15s etc. out of business. You cant be sued when you dont exist. All im trying to say is that there is no point in being protected when you cant manufacter your products anymore. About the NRA though; Im really getting sick of them they rarely stand up for gun rights. They are much more interested in the protection of duck hunters than in the preservation of the second amendment.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:16:00 PM EDT
if the house bill were made law i'd say it's time to start feeding the hogs
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:17:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2003 2:19:56 PM EDT by dbrowne1]
Why should we negotiate? This bill to protect gun manufacturers is POINTLESS. Even liberal judges are throwing these suits out left and right. The Dems have no leverage if this is what they're trying to do, and the AW Ban is one of the NRA's top priorities. They have said as much. Shit, let them filabuster until the end of the current Congress for all I care. Then they'll never even get a chance to bring the AW ban to the floor.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:21:48 PM EDT
NO COMPROMISE!!! When I called my Senators, Rep, and the White House I politely told them I could not vote for ANYONE who takes part in enacting an AW renewal, and politely reminded them of '94. I didn't say a word about the lawsuit bill. Guess I should have stated that while I support the latter, the AW renewal leaves NO room for negotiation.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:29:30 PM EDT
Originally Posted By dbrowne1: Why should we negotiate? This bill to protect gun manufacturers is POINTLESS. Even liberal judges are throwing these suits out left and right.
View Quote
But there is a point... even though the suits are being dismissed, it costs the manufacturers serious $$$$ defending themselves through years of litigation. The antis and litigants OTOH, have lawyers working for them Pro Bono or on a contingency basis. The legislation being filed wouldn't even be nessicary if we had a "loser pays" system.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:32:44 PM EDT
Hmmm... I wonder if an amendment that renews the ban could be successfully added to this bill. --Mike
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:33:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Tactus: Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said that he would offer legislation that would bar immunity for gun shops that consistently violate laws governing gun sales.
View Quote
I hate to say it but I could live with that. There are some fuckhead dealers out there that could use a bitch slap. Of course, before Chuckie gets his little bill us gun owners have to get something in return. [:D]
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:37:04 PM EDT
Originally Posted By dbrowne1: Why should we negotiate? This bill to protect gun manufacturers is POINTLESS. Even liberal judges are throwing these suits out left and right.
View Quote
] Tobacco lawsuits were also thrown out when they first started up. Now, the tobacco companies are paying billions. Suits against gun companies are being thrown out now, but what about 10 years from now? There's no such thing as too much protection.
Shit, let them filabuster until the end of the current Congress for all I care. Then they'll never even get a chance to bring the AW ban to the floor.
View Quote
Now that's a nice scenario. Seems like the Dems are filibustering every damm thing these days. They just cannot accept the fact that they aren't in power anymore.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:42:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mcaswell: Hmmm... I wonder if an amendment that renews the ban could be successfully added to this bill.
View Quote
Wouldn't matter if the Senate did it...the House would never approve it when it kicked back to them.
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:44:12 PM EDT
1) Schumer He should read the bill again... That (revocation of immunity in cases where the law has been broken) is allready in there 2) Fillibusters Ever notice how the Dems are threatening to fillibuster everything??? Maybe that rule change makes sense (i.e. eliminate the chance for a filibuster perminantly)...
Link Posted: 5/14/2003 2:53:52 PM EDT
There is a critical difference between tobacco and gun suits - Tobacco causes harm when used in its lawful and intended manner, and such harm is not obvious from the nature of the product (or at least it wasn't until warning labels came into the picture). Such is not true of guns, and EVERYBODY knows this. Every lawsuit against a gun maker should be 12b6'ed out of the courtroom - there is no claim, period. We don't need new law to deal with this. Costs of current suits should be addressed by fee shifting. Make the liberal gungrabbing pukes pay for their arrogance by making them pay for the gun makers' attorneys' fees.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 12:35:58 AM EDT
I am encouraged with the republicans and democrats coming together as AMERICANS and showing the world what peace and harmony in a great democracy can accomplish.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 12:48:42 AM EDT
There these scumbags go again making BS backroom deals.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 12:48:59 AM EDT
Do you guys remember when the "94" ban was going for a vote and we were told Bob Dole was considering filibustering the bill so it doesn't get passed? Then there was an 11th hour push to fax and write Dole's office to where we bogged down his fax machine so bad, nothing came through... He never did what he said he was going to do. See, we also threaten and fluff our feathers. They're doing the same thing right now. The AWB is such a political hot potato, nobody wants to touch it except a few who are not up for re-election anytime soon...
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 1:35:33 AM EDT
They are politicians. Anything and everything is on the table. Can remember all the Repubs declaring The AWB of '94 as a 'reasonable' compromise. We gotta stay on them.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 3:40:34 AM EDT
We don't have to negotiate. The ban EXPIRES! Let the new proposed bill fail on its own.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 12:54:19 AM EDT
That's the idea. Some people have to be reminded that some things are not up for negotiation, especially [b]Politicians[/b]. Silence means aquiescence to them and they ALWAYS have to be reminded. Boyle's Law at work.
Top Top