Senate Background Check Gun Bill Defeated

[scoyoc5]

Its simple...he will not listen to the people.  The people have spoken. But yet he insists on trying to push his agenda on gun control. He is so blinded by his own arrogance it's ridiculous

[bigdave]

I believe in maximum freedom and that it goes hand in hand with personal responsibility.  These principles are in direct opposition to the current philosophy of big government and their involvement in EVERY aspect of our lives. I know what is best for me and my family, I don't need some bureaucrat in D.C. to tell me how to live.  That is the agenda I'm referring to and will peacefully resist as long as I am able.

[Fl0und3rz]

Because he is an egomaniac and hates to lose? Because he truly believes that the bill would have made the country safer? Because he was fiending for a cigarette? I’m guessing mostly the first one.

Civilian gun ownership is, for most of us, a coal mine canary. If it’s threatened, its an indication that our fundamental liberties are in dire jeopardy. However, we need to remember that there are some poisons that won’t kill canaries, but are absolutely lethal to the miners.

This is linear thinking.  Individual liberties are under attack on all fronts (by both parties).  It is the nature of government and of many who chose to govern, unfortunately.  It just so happens that the guy in charge's favorite liberty to demonize happens to be the right to defend oneself.   

It also happens that self defense is the last resort of a people suffering a long train of abuses. If a government did not have evil designs, and all do, eventually, when left unchecked, then that government would not have any issue with a healthy right of self-defense.  2A attacks that purport to effect public safety, against all common sense, while trampling the individual liberties of millions, run counter to that wisdom.  Rather than give up a little liberty to gain a large measure of safety - still a dubious proposition - gun owners are being asked - no, attempted to be compelled - to give up a lot of liberty in exchange for what, exactly?  Is it just the illusion of something being done in the name of safety?  Nobody can say with a straight face that the proposals on the table will prevent another Newtown, Aurora, etc.  It's not tinfoil hat domain to suspect that there may be an ulterior motive at play, when all the "facts," polls, "statistics," and other assorted lies don't add up to what they are purported to support.  I don't care if you'll forgive me for not believing a word out of this guy's mouth after Fast and Furious, Benghazi, etc. (and other daily examples too numerous to mention).

So it's little wonder that people get worked up when that right to self defense is being threatened. 

I believe you have a reputation for believing, paraphrasing, that the one would never come out for gun control.  I'll pass on your wisdom.  Tip: The attempt at redeeming (told you so) your presumed credibility probably serves more as a thumb in your adversaries' eyes than it does to bolster your position of authority.

ETA: As far as what the agenda is or may be, who knows?  What is this fundamental change he speaks of?  Can you define it?  If it is Great Britain, I don't want it.  If it is Cypress, I don't want it.  How long do think the government of Cypress would stand after the rather unprecedented seizure of private wealth if the citizens of Cypress had a healthy right of self-defense?  You seem to be conveniently obtuse in the face of inconvenient realizations.

If it is more identity politics, more division along racial and socioeconomic lines, more demonization of opponents, more unilateral anti- or extra-constitutional action, more taxpayer-funded or after-birth abortions, more compulsion from an ever-growing leviathan located thousands of miles from my concerns, etc. I don't want it.

If enough people don't want the fundamental change, and there is not a healthy right of self-defense, what is to stop them from forcing it anyway?  We could go all Cypress on them?

[huntnphool]

Mag believes in Dear Leader no matter what he wants to do or does to this country. There's no reasoning with the followers.

But... he told us so! 

 I did! I said that this bill didn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell, and that there would be no significant change to current gun laws.

This is along the lines of what I was getting at Mags.

 Who actually thought this had a chance of becoming law? Did it ever have a chance of getting through the house if the senate passed it?........NO!!!!........and don't you think Obama knew this?

 I think Obama is evil, pure and simple, but I do believe he is a intelligent man and well versed in politics. This whole dog and pony show has little to do with guns, although if he could have gotten rid of them in the process then he'd take it. This is about the 2014 election, and taking over the house, where he and his administration could get through any regulation they wanted before he was gone.

 The reason Obama is pissed is because this was supposed to pass the senate and get rejected by the house, where Obama could blame the republicans, the politicians that don't care about your kids or their safety. He is trying to get control of the house, and Supreme Court and this is a game he is playing, parading the parents of Sandy Hook around for the country to see is just part of it. He knew there was zero chance the bill would get to his desk, so he is playing politics and the blame game for the 2014 election. That was his plan and his own party stuck a monkey in his wrench.

 I think anyone with truly a "open mind" can see what is actually happening here, its all about government control and keeping the Democratic party controlling the strings.

 And by the way, I'm not the one that said it couldn't be accomplished with a armed populace.
 

[Elkaholic daWg]

Mag believes in Dear Leader no matter what he wants to do or does to this country. There's no reasoning with the followers.

But... he told us so! 

I did! I said that this bill didn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell, and that there would be no significant change to current gun laws. You guys need me, I’m the voice of reason when you all spin off the planet every time a politician says he doesn’t like guns. 

 
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/biden-gun-bill-defeat/2013/04/18/id/500224

Biden: Executive Actions Coming In Wake of Gun Bill Defeat

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/biden-gun-bill-defeat/2013/04/18/id/500224#ixzz2QrXX57oK
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

[snowpack]

Here's some more Biden stretch (bs)... http://news.yahoo.com/look-joe-biden-seriously-sketchy-gun-claim-200225552.html

[csaaphill]

I say wide spread civil unrest if he does.