Why It’s A Good Idea For The Senate To Vote On The Gun Control Bill

Okay, this is as political as I am ever going to get in this blog.

I think it’s a good idea to let the new gun control bill come to the floor of the Senate, to be debated and voted on. Here are my reasons.

  • In the debates all the senators who speak will be on the record about where they stand, and all the senators’ votes will be on record. Then we can vote accordingly the next election.
  • People like Diane Feinstein and Chuck Schumer will get a spotlight to say something really ignorant and stupid, which can be replayed at our leisure for the rest of time.
  • The anti-gun faction will finally get a chance to say things that, if enacted, would violate the Second Amendment, and probably other parts of the Constitution as well.
  • Eventually, the bill will be voted down. In this I have no doubt.
  • The anti-gun faction will not be able to claim that they never got their chance to make their point or be heard. In fact, their illogical and unconstitutional points will be part of the public record.
  • The anti-gun faction will blame the NRA, (which will be true, especially when you consider all the NRA members who are swamping their senators right now) and the NRA’s membership will grow even more.

My two senators, Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss, are both on record saying they think this bill violates the Second Amendment, and will vote against it on the floor, but they voted for cloture to let that happen.

If we don’t give this bad bill it’s day, the anti-gun faction will just whine and complain, and it will be televised and marketed by their media friends, and we will be back in this situation again.

I’m willing to let the system do what it is designed to do.

16 thoughts on “Why It’s A Good Idea For The Senate To Vote On The Gun Control Bill

  1. Whatever outcome the bill faces, I agree with you completely in principle. We “hired” these people to represent us, to debate and to vote and to express themselves on the record. If they don’t, they aren’t doing the job.


  2. This is an inexact science, but I fear we have allowed the debate topic to be reframed in a disadvantageous way. The bill in question has no relation to the PR and parading around of Newton parents, so we should not be voting on this as a solution to violence and mass shootings. That’s how its being framed by media and politicians.

    I see the value of getting people on record, but we need to not fall into the trap of trying that strategy when they choose the topic, the playing field, the terms and the corresponding PR. We need to get them on record when the topic is relevant and the playing field is level.

    Allowing the “background check” bill be be validated as a potential solution and allowing it to be associated with Newton and other events is dangerous. Background checks sound good and feel good to the uninformed and it’s not seen as dangerous to vote for some watered-down common sense version of that.

    I would prefer a bolder strategy of saying “this is not at all relevant to solving the problem you proclaim so we won’t waste time voting on a red herring”

    Or something…


  3. I agree. We need control of the Senate to have any chance of protecting the 2nd Amendment in the future. The filibuster threat felt like a nice stick in the eye to Dirty Harry, but in reality, it just gave red-state Democrats political cover and allowed libs to cry that we are obstructing the will of the people. This way, they have to stand with their wacko base or stand for the Constitution. Choosing the latter means they keep their jobs in 2014. Choosing the former means Democrats lose the Senate.


    1. Too, I feel like a filibuster that prevented the bill from consideration would just lead to interminable whining that the Horrible Baby Killing Bushmaster crowd would not let America hear their Common Sense Solutions. This way, we hear their story and can finally, officially, say No, thank you.


  4. The problem with proceeding to debate is that senators will do what they do best, which is to befog and obfuscate the issue in order to come down firmly on both sides. You’ll have senators happily pointing to votes for and against all the different procedures. Debate on the floor will only allow grandstanding and amendments to cloud the issue, and might allow some really sneaky legerdemain that trashes our gun rights. The only good vote in this case is a vote to kill the whole thing at every opportunity, from the motion to proceed, to final passage.

    Now that the attempt at blocking consideration has failed, I have to agree with the antis — “They deserve a vote.” “They” in this case means the senators themselves — victims of shootings have nothing to do with this legal abomination. And it needs to be a clean vote. Up or down on the Second Amendment.

    But it will not be that clear.


  5. I truly hope you are right, and they don’t secretly pack the bill and negotiate over some weekend to pass some horror show.
    As they did with Clinton’s AWB over Thanksgiving weekend…


  6. I hope your faith in the system is justified. I’ m worried Reid and the rest of the statists will use some procedural shenanigans to make an end run around the conservatives and we’ll be trying to defeat a “truly bipartisan”bill in the house….way too close for something that shouldn’t even be considered.


  7. Pingback: So why am I not upset that GOP Senators didn't filibuster the gun bill today? - An NC Gun Blog

  8. Borepatch

    You are absolutely correct. They key issue is not whether the debate will expose the facts and issues in their adamantine purity – of course they wont, and it will be nothing but Washington pettifoggery.

    But Schumer and Feinstein are our best allies in this game of gun owners turning out at the polls. Give ’em a microphone and stand back. The torrent of Stupid will motivate our side next year.


  9. This is one of the craziest arguments yet. Everyone who cares about these issues already knows everything the anti-gun side thinks. The anti-gun side is open about their willingness to ignore the 2nd Amendment and the rest of the Constitution. No new “outrageous” statements from Feinstein et al. will matter, especially since MSM will report them as “commonsense” and “reflections of the will of the vast majority of Americans.”

    What will happen is that Feinstein et al. will demand a lot, idiots like Toomey & McCain & Manchin & Tester will compromise and give ’em just a little, and pass some monstrosity. Then we’ll get to see whether Boehner has even a little backbone. I think we’re well on the road to national registration and confiscation.

    We ought to be taking every possible opportunity, including supporting filibusters and other parliamentary maneuvers, to stop this.


Comments are closed.