Gun Liability Bill defeated in Senate

On final passage of S. 1805, the Gun Liability Bill:

YEA - 8
NAY - 90 (includes Kerry and Edwards)

Before the final vote, both Senators Reed (D-RI) and Craig (R-ID) urged to reject the bill.

Reed said that, while many bad things about the legislation had been fixed, there was still too much bad in there to support it. Craig suggested that it was a "clean bill" initially but the passage of so many amendments (including the assault weapons ban and the closing of the gun show loophole) meant that it was "dramatically wounded."

So I guess those ended up being poison pill issues for the legislation. At this moment it's not even going to make it to conference.

-CollegeDude
With good news and bad news

...that's the good news.

Yea America. What kind of a hunter needs an assault rifle? A pretty piss poor one or an absolute coward. To me the justification for owning an assault rifle is that you are scared shitless all the time and needs mounds of fire power. Cowards is what I think. Scared shitless cowards.

But the AWB has nothing to do with machine guns. If you would like to purchase a machine gun, however, there is nothing stopping you from doing so right now (at the federal level, at least), it's just expensive and time consuming.

ignorance is generally not a crime.

he would like to know that he can legally buy a machine gun right now. Maybe now that he knows he'll decide to take the plunge and buy a real, select-fire, honest to God AK-47.

Being able to buy a machine gun that is?

Why is it it's ok to regulate what kind of car I can drive but not what type of gun I can own?

I'm no fan of the National Firearms Act. I'd like to see it and all of the other federal firearms legislation repealed. I'm not interested in regulating what kind of car you drive either.

but you're welcome to it.

I hope less people share it as it's that sort of irresponsibility that leads to so much tragedy...

I suppose would be ok then for teens to zoom down highways in Indy 500 race cars?

I don't think they're going to repeal any federal firearms laws anytime soon no matter how "pro-gun" the current Republican majority supposedly is.

I don't think you have to worry about teens driving around in Indy 500 race cars. They're pretty expensive.

I'm not worried, becuase thankfully their are common sense regulations in place that make it very difficult if not impossible for someone like Paris Hilton to buy one and drive it down the freeway.

You see, it was just a matter of common sense that a car, even though it's used by everyone for very practical everyday purposes can be and would be misused and be very dangerous and cause lot's of deaths. They still do. Therefore cars are strictly regulated and there are certain types you are just not allowed to own because they would be especially dangerous. Just common sense.

"I'm not worried, becuase thankfully their are common sense regulations in place that make it very difficult if not impossible for someone like Paris Hilton to buy one and drive it down the freeway. "

So there are a few teenagers who might be able to afford an F1 car. Why would they go cruising down the highway in one? If Paris Hilton wants to buy an F1 car, then she can do it. There's no law stopping her. If she went crazy and decided to drive this car that probably costs millions of dollars down the highway in an apparent attempt to commit suicide, do you really think whatever law you pass is going to stop her?

"You see, it was just a matter of common sense that a car, even though it's used by everyone for very practical everyday purposes can be and would be misused and be very dangerous and cause lot's of deaths. They still do. Therefore cars are strictly regulated and there are certain types you are just not allowed to own because they would be especially dangerous. Just common sense."

There's no regulation preventing someone from owning whatever kind of car they want, regardless of how dangerous that car might be. Getting it registered for use on public roads is an entirely different matter.

You told me not to worry, that's not an answer to what I asked. But from this post it seems to me that you DO think it's ok, if they can get their hands on one.

As I said, irresponsible, but you're entitled.

The fact remains, it is against the law, and rightfully so, for that to happen. The regulations are seen as common sense by any reasonable person and the fact that certain vehicles are prohibited from being used and/or modified to make them more dangerous, is also common sense. It's a matter of public safety.

in your outlandish teenager driving an F1 car down the highway scenario is driving an unregistered vehicle on a public street. Is there even jail time for that? People drive unregistered cars down the highway everyday and society hasn't collapsed yet.

If some extremely rich teenager goes crazy and drives an f1 car down the highway I'm sure the speeding ticket would be impressive and no doubt they would be cited with driving an unregistered vehicle. There might very well be a citation for driving without insurance too, since I doubt you could get insurance on an f1 car for use on a highway.

Weren't we talking about machine guns or something at some point?

I guess that doesn't bother you. You know, the fact that it's a very dangerous vehicle that can travel at very high speeds and people can get killed? I mean, that's the whole point of what I'm saying. It's dangerous and should therefore be strictly regulated. Very simple, common sense, responsible idea. Just as it's irresponsible and dangerous to allow just anyone to get their hand on and ride a formula 500 race car (or an illegally modified, much cheaper Mustang) down the highway, it's irresponsible and dangerous to allow people to be able to fire machine guns at their leisure.

At least cars have a practical use.

I asked you, essentially and initially, if that was a good thing. To get be able to freely get a machine gun that is. You said you didn't think it was a good idea, I think.

with this car thing. You buy a car. You want to drive it on public roads? You register it. You obey the speed limits or you get fined. There aren't regulations on how fast cars can go when they come out of the factory. Most of them will go quite fast, much higher than any speed limit you're going to find in this country. That's all just fine by me.

If some screwball wants to try to drive an f1 car down the highway, good luck to them. I wouldn't try it personally. It sounds like a waste of money to me. I'm sure when they're caught, if they survive, they'll have to pay a speeding ticket and probably a fine for driving an unregistered vehicle.

As far as machine guns go I have no problem with people buying them or using them. As far as I'm concerned, you should be able to pick up the Sears Catalog and order one, like back in the day.

That's pretty irresponsible, but you're entitled. Luckily there ARE regulations in place so irresponsible people like you can't buy machine guns in catalogues "just like dem good ol' days! Yeee-up!" :eyes:

pick up a magazine and buy a machine gun anymore, but there's nothing stopping me or pretty much anyone else that can legally own a gun from buying a machine gun. Depending on state laws, of course. In my home state, for example, select-fire weapons are banned, so I'll have to stick with something full auto only like maybe a Browning M2.

You'll have to go through a long and tedious background check, of course, and the ATF guys need some pictures and fingerprints, I think. Also, you'll have to pay the $200 tax since the NFA is a tax measure, after all.

or not...:shrug:

Personally, I don't think anyone should be able to get their hands on a machine gun...Something that dangerous, with no practical use aside from killing, should be restricted to as few people as possible, if anyone.

Some might say that's just plain ol' common sense from the good ol' days.

have no practical use for a machine gun, no one else should be allowed to own one either?

"Personally, I don't think anyone should be able to get their hands on a machine gun...Something that dangerous, with no practical use aside from killing, should be restricted to as few people as possible, if anyone."

I don't really see how a machine gun is anymore dangerous than any other gun. If someone intends to do harm, they're going to do it, regardless of what kind of weapon they decide to use. Shotguns, rifles, and handguns of the semi-auto variety are all plenty deadly. It only takes one bullet to kill someone.

You'll want to keep all of the exemptions for government agencies in place, I expect, to make sure when they want machine guns they can get them as easily and cheaply as possible.

What practical use is there for a machine gun?

It's dangerous, even more dangerous than a non-automatic gun, and it should be restricted from being used, just like dangerous vehicles (for which there's actually a practical use) are restricted from being used. Regardless of what you think of the regulations, they're common sense. Obviously, you have a different idea about common sense. You're entitled. Thankfully, many disagree and there are regulations in place, even if not adequate enough, IMO.

Unfortunate as it is for gun nuts, it's common sense to regulate guns and to restrict the possession of some them, as that's the only way to ensure they're not USED. It's a matter of public safety. Dangerous things need to be restricted and regulated. The amount and nature of that regulation is debatable. I think proper gun control laws are just common sense, including banning the possession of certain weapons.

are only restricted from use on public land. You can drive whatever you want on your own property. F1 cars race at race tracks all over the place, they're only restricted on public roads. Are you saying that people shouldn't be able to drive or shoot on their own property?

As for practical uses for a machine gun, how about just shooting it on your property? Or taking it to a big machine gun shoot and firing at sticks of dynamite a few hundred yards out. Who cares what someone wants to do with one as long as they aren't out killing people and robbing banks and all that (which are illegal, by the way).

Machine guns are no more dangerous than any other gun when used in a safe manner. Like it or not, owning a machine gun is legal in most states. If you don't like that, then try and get your representatives to introduce legislation to regulate them some more. Hell, it would probably even pass, no one cares about people who own machine guns legally. Most people think you can't own them legally.

I use my MGs for therapy and stress-relief. When I've had a stressful week, I'll go out to the range and hose down the mountain. It's very relaxing.

Since the law you're defending is the LAST Federal Jim Crow law on the books...

are illegal?

that makes it illegal to drive a really fast car. This'll be interesting...

You can have any kind of car you want. But it does have to meet certain requirements to drive on public roads. I shoot my rifle on my land so guess what?? I bother no-one good try though.
Joe

There are regulations for something that actually has a practical use, but might be deadly. They regulate it's use and ban the use of certain types of it.

You gonna buy an assault weapon and never use it?

How silly.

I own a bunch, all legally.

There are 250,000 legal machineguns in the US. Care to guess how many legally owned machineguns have been used to commit a crime since 1934, when they started keeping track?

Scared shitless cowards", he shouted out behind the safety of his keyboard.

Its not about being a coward Its about being free.I spent 7.5 months in Afghanistan only to find that scared/paranoid soccer moms want to take my rifle, the one that only comes out for target shooting. The US is into this mass punishment thing instead of punishing the criminal they punish everyone. People wake up!!! criminals will always have these weapons you will never change that. Well I for one feel that today was a Victory for us gun owners. The Assault Weapon Ban is dead for now(hopefully for good) which is good!! It is just too bad the the gun liability bill had to die with it. And seriously suing a gun manufacture for someone being shot is like suing GM for being run over by a GMC truck. Its these things that make liberals look stupid, please stop!! pretty please!! Oh yea Ted Kennedy needs to be replaced he make us Democrats look stupid. It is a Bushmaster rifle not a buckmaster rifle (insert bad word) you would think he would put down his scotch to study a little before talking in the senate.
JOE

Ignorance about the AWB abounds.

:-)

ain't gonna happen.

Kerry was stomping around in a minefield on this one....

-- a widow thanks to the DC sniper. She lobbied very hard against this bill.

for individuals' use of their products is assinine. But this is an issue that should be decided by courts, not by the legislature. Isn't there already legal precedent for courts rejecting these suits anyway? I cringe anytime a law is proposed to grant blanket immunity to anyone.

But the aim is not for them to win the lawsuits, it is to bog manufacturers and dealers down with so many that they will go out of business trying to defend them all.

Also, the legislation would not block anybody from suing in court at all. It would only allow the judge to make a decision to deny nuisance and frivolous lawsuits to continue based on this law.

to bankrupt manufacturers through multiple and repeated litigation, even if the suits are unsucessful.

.... kind of like the ones certain people bring against abortion clinics and doctors.

Democrats Breaux (LA), Daschle (SD), Lieberman (CT), Lincoln (AR) and Pryor (AR) all voted for the gun liability bill. Republicans Lugar (IN), McCain (AZ) and Voincovich (OH) also supported the bill. Edwards (NC) had already left the Capitol and Tim Johnson (SD) is undergoing treatment for prostate cancer so both did not vote.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00030

Somebody show this dimbulb the true meaning of "dramatically wounded". How about an urban emergency room on Saturday night?

What percentage of the injuries are caused by assualt weapons? I have been looking for these numbers for a while and can't locate them?

Do you know what percentage of the injuries in an urban emergency room on Saturday night are caused by assualt weapons?

there are injuries in an urban ER on a Saturday night that are caused by (BANNED) assault weapons? I think my post fairly unambiguously states that somebody needs to teach the dimbulb the meaning of "dramatically wounded." I hope you're not trying to read a bunch of stuff into my post that only exists in your imagination.

for a time. And GSW (gun shot wounds) were actually fairly rare (not like you'd think from listening to rap songs or watching movies). The ones I did see, however, were almost without exeception, wounds from small-caliber handguns (usually 9mm).

Lot of times it's the morgue.

And the first responders (EMTs/Police) call the coroner.

4 digets 4 you on the very next post!....... Let us win in November!

Thanks, I posted so much today that it just blew past me. :)

It's seems that we have many gun nut new guys now on board and we are once again doomed to hear all the cliche lines about the alledged right for individuals to bear arms..... Sure, We'll witness a new cycle of all the worn out, banal pearls of wisdom that the above mentioned new crop of "constutional scholars" will be aimlessly rattling on about..... The bottom line is that for DEMOCRATS that hope to retake the white house, guns are a NON ISSUE. John Kerry used guns in war... the chimp didn't: how's that for a gun issue?

doesn't make the problem go away. Kerry stepped on his crank with his golf shoes today. The video of him, Schumer, Feinstein, and Kennedy that was shot today will hurt him in a large part of the country, parts of the country that he NEEDS to win.

And from the anti-gun side, we'll hear the same old preposterous arguments that "the right of the people" named in the Second Amendment is neither a "right" nor does it belong to the "people."

I don't want these government jerks taking my guns away. I don't understand why it's a liberal tenant to take weapons away from citizens. I'm liberal yet I don't trust this government to deprive me of one more thing for my own good.