"Senate Rejects All 4 Gun Measures Background check expansion, no fly-list measures fail
Jun 20, 2016
Roll Call Staff
The Senate failed Monday to take any action to limit gun sales to people whose names appear on federal terror watch lists, as Republicans voted to impose a three-day waiting period and Democrats sought to allow the government to ban such sales. The votes followed the quick rejection of a pair of amendments that would have expanded background checks for people buying guns.
Senate Democrats waged a nearly 15-hour filibuster last week to force these votes on gun control measures after a June 12 mass shooting that left 49 victims dead in Orlando. "What am I going to tell 49 grieving families?...What am I going to tell the community of Orlando?" Florida Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson said. "Sadly what I'm going to have to tell them is the NRA won again."
Connecticut Sen. Christopher S. Murphy, who led the filibuster, said before the votes that he wasn't certain of the outcome but believed it was important to put senators on the record. Others argued that the Senate should vote on something that could actually be adopted. "Today's votes to make a safer America failed," Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-NY, tweeted. "But they will not be the last in this fight. It's still the beginning."
The first vote of the afternoon came on a Republican-backed amendment would have increased funding for federal background checks and notified law enforcement if someone investigated for terrorism in the past five years tries to purchase a gun. The measure, sponsored by Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, received 53 yes votes, short of the 60 needed for adoption.
A broader Democratic amendment garnered only 44 of the 60 votes needed for passage. The measure, sponsored by Murphy, D-Conn., aimed to expand the National Instant Criminal Background Check System by requiring a boost in how records are shared for identifying anyone who should be banned from purchasing guns. It would also require a background check for every gun sale, including those on the internet and at gun shows.
Afterward, the Senate took up a measure sponsored by Texas Republican John Cornyn that would impose a 72-hour delay on gun purchases by people on terror watch lists. The amendment received 53 of 60 votes needed for adoption.
California Democrat Dianne Feinstein's amendment, which would allow the attorney general to stop gun purchases by those on terrorist watch lists, also failed after receiving 47 of the 60 votes needed.
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, told reporters she hopes to unveil a bipartisan compromise on gun control Tuesday, saying there is “tremendous interest from both sides of the aisle, which is encouraging.” Collins said she would like to have a press conference after caucus lunches Tuesday.
“I realize people feel very strongly in support of the Feinstein and Cornyn amendments, but I think it’s evident that neither has the votes necessary to pass,” she added. “So my hope is that we’ll be able to present a bipartisan compromise.”
Cornyn said Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has told Collins she will get a vote on her proposal if she wants one. He said he hasn't read Collins proposal because it's not finished yet.
Feinstein said she was skeptical that under Collins's version "we would be left with a bill that has no teeth."
Some member crossed party lines. Republicans Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Mark Kirk of Illinois, both facing tough re-election bids, voted for both the versions of the terror watch list amendment.
Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he was skeptical of Ayotte's motives. "She should make up her mind and not be a hypocrite," Reid said. "The junior senator from New Hampshire says she's voting yes on everything. That's not logical but that's what she's doing."
Democrat Jon Tester, a Montana senator who leads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, voted against the background check amendment championed by Democrats because of what an aide described as concerns about blocking relatives and neighbors from buying and selling firearms to one another without running background checks."
Your dead do not trump my rights....
That, you, the federal government has failed them. That the death of those 49 can be laid at your feet. All the signs were there. You did nothing. FBI alerted after he was turned down buying body armor and weapons. You did nothing. He was left to roam and execute the wounded for 3 hours. You did nothing. His father is a Taliban supporting, American hating Muslim. You did nothing. He attended a mosque where hatred and violence was preached. You did nothing. (Well you did stop the investigation into the mosque, but i digress). All the warnings were there, all the signs, past history, investigated by the FBI three times. And yet you did NOTHING. You, Sen Bill Nelson and every appeasing, boot licking, Muslim apologetic, is responsible, and you should be drug from your cushy office and held accountable.
With out a doubt the best reply/explanation I have read to date about the massacre.
Politicians of both parties continually do whatever is politically expedient; whatever they think will get them re-elected. That, and fundraising.....self enrichment.... at the forefront of their thinking at all times.
He who believes otherwise is either willfully ignorant or woefully naive.
The only thing close to the loophole is related to individuals attending the show, walking around with a gun to sell. But even in Illinois, by law, you are required to call a number at the IL State Police to verify the purchaser has a valid FOID card. I haven't seen anyone like that at the shows I've attended. Everybody seems to be keeping what they have.
Basically, the gun show loophole is a myth created by the leftists.
Zbone,
I can't speak for any state other than TX. If you walked into a large Gun Show for instance the Dallas Market Hall show, carry with you $1000 cash you could find all components needed to build an AR 15 .223 or AR 10 .308 and not sign anything or register anything, and could probably find a vendor to assemble it for you. Then buy maybe 3-4 hundred rnds of ammo. Buy magazines, an inexpensive scope. Then walk out with money left over. Just depends on how fancy you want the gun to be. I don't think it's a loophole. It's legal transactions.
If something like this passed, does that mean all private sales will be illegal, meaning I can't sell my Remington 870 to my buddy at work?
sleepyhunter's Link
Sleepy, correct. Heck you can buy 80% lowers off the internet without an FFL. BUT, you will need the jigs to finish the machining and you have to do it yourself. The second someone else does it, they are manufacturing guns!!!!
Yes sir. 100% correct. I would think you could buy any part for an AR on the internet. If you have the skill and the tools. A person could build one very easily. Also they are building AR's now in calibers other than 223 or 308. I've seen 6.8, 300 blackout, and 300 Win mag. I would think the same would apply to making your own ammo.
It isn't just federal law, state laws are different in other states. Things are different in Virginia and they have some great gun shows. You can't go to a neighboring state and buy a handgun or AR 15 without it being sent to a Maryland FFL dealer for you to pick up and do the paperwork. I can buy normal rifles and shotguns in neighboring states but still have to pass a background check and do the paperwork. At Cabelas, in Delaware, I have bought shotguns and it took less than two minutes to pass the background check.
Congress not doing anything is much better than Congress doing something stupid or anti-Constitutional.
What is being seen by Ryan is the "Trump effect"...The beginnings of appearance of a spine to actually listen to the voters whom they have disappointed so much the past several elections. I believe that they were self amazed when they found they could oppose the monster they themselves created--Trump as their candidate.
"Resist we muc"
Gun control Senator Chuck Schumer (D.-NY) is cheering the decision by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to allow another vote on gun control by the end of next week. The Senate rejected four gun control bills on Monday, only to have Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) introduce a fifth bill on Tuesday and have McConnell promise her it would get a vote.
The Chicago Tribune quoted Senator John Cornyn (R.-TX) saying McConnell made clear that if Collins wants a vote on her bill “she’ll get one.”
In other words, after defeating Senator Chris Murphy’s (D.-CT) attempt to use the Orlando terror attack as an opportunity to expand background checks to gun shows and also defeating Senator Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CT) to create a watch list of people who used to be on watch lists, McConnell is still opening the door to one more chance for gun control.
And Senator Schumer is cheering.
In fact, Senator Schumer says one of the great opportunities provided by Collins’ bill is the opportunity to break the NRA’s hold on the Republican Senate.
But to deny even having a vote plays into the democrat's hands. As if the bill was good and would have passed if not for some procedural scheme.
Its also tragic that countless lives are lost in alcohol related auto accidents.
That every day people die from drug overdose's.
Thousands upon thousands of people die in this country every year through alcohol, drug and non-gun related deaths.
If someone has a mind to kill with a gun are you simple enough to believe they care about the law?
And are you simple enough to believe that such laws will eliminate them not getting a gun?
Heroin is illegal for people to have... How's that working out ? They still get it don't they.
You want to stop violence...Quit being silly and think law will stop it.
Start being smart and start changing the minds of people.
I was listening to the Orlando news, the gun control talk.
Flipped the station and Tim McGraw was singing..."always be humble and kind"
You tell me which would work better stop the violence.
Once a crime is committed with a gun, it is sold to another part of the U.S. so it becomes harder to trace and follow. They said its not uncommon for an illegal gun to be involved in multiple crimes stretching across the country.
To be clear, these are ILLEGAL guns SMUGGLED into the U.S. These were not legally purchased guns!!! So guns are no different than illegal drugs.... And that has worked out so well......
You may want to rethink your attitude about Mr. McGraw when a short time ago he came out anti-gun and a gun control proponent...
How a country singer can get away with that with the good ole boys amazes me...
No kidding? I would not have believed it. Never cared for him or his music anyway, but do like his wife.
