By LAUREN FRENCH | 5/28/14 12:54 PM EDT
House Democrats are considering attaching an amendment to an appropriations bill that would force stricter background checks for gun purchases.[H/T: Guns Save Lives]
Democratic whip Steny Hoyer said top democrats are in "discussions" on an amendment but have not decided what the language would say specifically.
Apparently, the point is to enact new requirements for dealers to report purchases of multiple "Assault Weapons".
Which has ... what? .. to do with insane clowns? (Except that one "It's All About Me" spoiled rich kid provided the impetus, and another proposes a do-nothing law with possibly less justification.)
What a bunch of Maroons!
You do realize, I hope, that this means our selected group of representatives will have to start all over the odious and imperfect definition of the term "Assault Weapons".
It's 1994 all over again.
No wonder Hoyer was not prepared to say what "the language would say specifically". They don't know. They don't have a clue. They have never had a clue ... but they do have an agenda.
No, their agenda is not to "Stop Gun Violence!".
Nor is it actually "Gun Control" (although it does have smatterings of "Yes, we ARE going to take your guns away -- we're not going to call it that, and we won't do it all at once but in small steps)."
What it is, is that they want to get re-elected.
Toward that end, they have to appear as if they are actually "Doing Something".
Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, said he was not hopeful Congress would ultimately act.
"I continue to hope so, but I continue not to have high expectations because of past performances." Hoyer said of chances that Congress could pass "meaningful" legislation on background checks.
OOOoooooo that's interesting. Let me count the ways:
- House Democrats are determined to pass (one or more) new Gun Control Laws
- They don't know what the law(s) will be
- They don't know what an "Assault Weapon" is
- They don't think the bill will pass ... whatever it is
- They DO know that their Democrat constituents expect them to "Do Something"
- This is to be proposed specifically because of the Santa Barbara shooting last Friday
If you don't think the bill is going to past, why waste our time with it?
Check me if I'm wrong, but if you're going to propose a new federal law, shouldn't you have an idea of its purpose? Shouldn't it relate to the incident which generated the inertia to pass new laws?
He said the amendment would likely be an effort to strike the “prohibition on requiring gun sellers to report on multiple sales on assault-type weapons.”
Didn't the attacks in Santa Barbara involve pistols, knives and a Black BMW? What has that to do with "Multiple sales of assault-type weapons"??? Weren't the 'instruments of mass murder' legally obtained?
I'm just an over-the-hill, broke-dick nerd from a small town in a forgotten state, so what I think may not mean much to Lord Hoyer. But it seems to me that the guy is just a whore trying to make a buck and keep her his corner in the Red Light District of D.C.
There comes a point in which Congressional reaction to societal solutions should logically include actions which address the issue.
This political practice of throwing mud and money to stop madmen from mayhem is fast approaching the point at which it's hard to tell which is the most insane ... the perpetrator or the politician.
Right now, I wonder if the best solution isn't to pay less attention to the mad men with the guns, and more attention to the Hookers with the votes. No, I don't think that Politicians who use a national tragedy to advance their political careers should be executed according to the laws of their state for Capital Crimes.
Lethal Injection is too humane for these congress critters. They deserve to spend a few days in stocks, where The People can throw sour fruit at them.
Then make them go out and work for a living, like the rest of us.
1 comment:
All politicians do the knee-jerk thing when the opportunity arises.
Post a Comment