# Brown won’t back a new weapons ban



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

*Brown won't back a new weapons ban*

Senator Scott Brown said he would not support a 
renewal of a federal assault weapons ban, which 
has garnered fresh attention after the killing of six 
people and the grave wounding of Representative 
Gabrielle Giffords.

(By Michael Levenson and Frank Philips, Globe Staff)


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2011)

It's about fucking time he did something that didn't turn my stomach


----------



## pahapoika (Nov 5, 2006)

this scott is a funny kid.

maybe he's trying to suck up to the right ( the people who got him in ) now that the election is drawing near.

not hard to be against any renewal of the "assault weapon ban' since it never went away in Mass.

wouldn't shed a tear if Lynchie kicks his ass


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

I agree with Brown's position, but this could be used against him in libertine Massachusetts. His saving garce when he's attacked during next year's campaign is that this law will have no effect on Massachusetts.


pahapoika said:


> this scott is a funny kid...wouldn't shed a tear if Lynchie kicks his ass


Every vote he makes has to be in line with the political reality of being a Republican senator of Massachusetts. People seem to forget it's not gonna get any better than Brown, and if you want him to be around until at least 2018, you might not agree with everything he does or votes for. So far, most of the big stuff (partiuclarly voting against Kagan) has been exactly where I want him to be.

Remeber, everyone still calls his election the "Massachusetts Miracle". There's a reason for that.


----------



## CJIS (Mar 12, 2005)

I figure Brown is closer to my political values than Uncle Teddy ever was.

Got to remember he is a Noob and has to kiss ass to certian people for the first term or else he's gone.


----------



## Killjoy (Jun 23, 2003)

> a
> renewal of a federal assault weapons ban, which
> has garnered fresh attention after the killing of six
> people and the grave wounding of Representative
> Gabrielle Giffords.


None of which had anything to do with the shooting, considering the shooter used a pistol. Here we go again....


----------



## trueblue (Jan 21, 2008)

pahapoika said:


> this scott is a funny kid.
> 
> maybe he's trying to suck up to the right ( the people who got him in ) now that the election is drawing near.
> 
> ...


A vote for Lynch? No WAY would I ever vote for that Kennedy wanna be!


----------



## 263FPD (Oct 29, 2004)

Killjoy said:


> None of which had anything to do with the shooting, considering the shooter used a pistol. Here we go again....


Yeah but it was that baaaaaaaad High Cap Pistol. Baaaaaaaad, Baaaaaaad Pistol. It's all your faul, Glock. If Loughner had a flint-lock, this tragedy would have never happened.


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2011)

Simon said:


> It's about fucking time he did something that didn't turn my stomach


Repeat after me; He is better than Ted Kennedy or Martha Coakley.


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2011)

263FPD said:


> Yeah but it was that baaaaaaaad High Cap Pistol. Baaaaaaaad, Baaaaaaad Pistol. It's all your faul, Glock. If Loughner had a flint-lock, this tragedy would have never happened.


If Loughner had driven a car into the crowd and killed 6 people, would there suddenly be a push to ban vehicles? Get real. The pols see an easy target (no pun intended) and they just can't help themselves. I'm thankful for any of them that will wade through the BS on this one, and do the right thing. When the next issue comes up, I'll reevaluate.


----------



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

*President*

*Obama Administration's New Proposed Gun Regulation for Border States Met With Bipartisan Dissent*

By Stephen Clark
Published January 15, 2011
| FoxNews.com

The Obama administration's plan to force new reporting requirements on thousands of gun dealers near the Mexico border is under fire from members of his own party.
At least three Democrats in the Senate and several more in the House are voicing opposition to a proposed regulation from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that would require about 8,500 gun dealers in four states - California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas - to report gun sales of two or more high-powered rifles sold within five consecutive business days.
The proposal isn't connected in any way to the mass shooting in Arizona last weekend that left six people dead and 14 others wounded, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., because the suspect used a handgun, which is already covered under these reporting requirements.
The new regulation would cover semiautomatic rifles greater than .22 caliber with detachable magazines.
Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, has asked the ATF to withdraw its request to the White House for emergency authority to enact the regulation.

Full Story:
Obama Administration's New Proposed Gun Regulation for Border States Met With Bipartisan Dissent - FoxNews.com


----------



## Kilvinsky (Jan 15, 2007)

trueblue said:


> A vote for Lynch? No WAY would I ever vote for that Kennedy wanna be!


Perfect, no way, but I could never bring myself to call him a Kennedy wanna be. I'm speaking for ME only here. He's pretty down to earth and has some similar values as I do, but over all, he's a Democrat so I'm always leary of anything he does.


----------



## Killjoy (Jun 23, 2003)

> Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, has asked the ATF to withdraw its request to the White House for emergency authority to enact the regulation.


That's how it starts, with agencies asking for "emergency powers", which are never then revoked. I didn't realize it was within the jurisdiction of the ATF to police issues in_ Mexico_.



> "Traver has been deeply aligned with gun control advocates and anti-gun activities," the NRA said in a statement last week. "This makes him the wrong choice to lead an enforcement agency that has almost exclusive oversight and control over the firearms industry, its retailers and consumers."


Here's the real story, the ATF is trying to expand its powers to interfere in legitimate firearms sales and Obama is trying to get his rabidly anti-gun buddy appointed to head the that very same organization. If you don't think the Democrats were only waiting until the right moment to strike on further eroding the 2nd amendment, you're crazy.


----------



## 7costanza (Aug 29, 2006)

The Father of the 9 yr old girl killed stated " there is no need for any more gun restrictions becasue of this isolated incident".


----------



## Kilvinsky (Jan 15, 2007)

Killjoy said:


> That's how it starts, with agencies asking for "emergency powers", which are never then revoked. I didn't realize it was within the jurisdiction of the ATF to police issues in_ Mexico_.


I give the Mexican authorities credit for trying (and dying in the effort) but it seems SOMEONE has to give them a hand!


----------



## Killjoy (Jun 23, 2003)

> I give the Mexican authorities credit for trying (and dying in the effort) but it seems SOMEONE has to give them a hand!


I have no issue with assisting them, what I have issue with is the Mexican authorities blaming the US for the massive influx of full-automatic weapons the cartels import. There's never been any proof that Mexican cartels are sending people into the US to conduct so-called "straw-man" buying of semi-automatic rifles and pistols to ship to their brethren in Mexico. Why would they? They can easily import full automatic weapons from countries south of Mexico. South America is awash with cheap AK's, Galils, HK 91's and M-16's. In addition to this there is a large amount of evidence that the corrupt Mexican military sells full automatic rifles to the cartels, some of which were given to them by the US government. And yet the Mexican government blames the sunset of the Clinton's so-called "assault weapons ban" for the troubles of their country. And what's worse they have the gall to come here and ask us to tighten our gun laws to prevent crime in their country, when there's no evidence it will have any effect on weapon the cartels get, and also, their own country's draconian gun laws have seemed to accomplished nothing to deter cartels as well.

Mexico needs to stop blaming the US for their troubles, clean out their corrupt government and go after the drug cartels with their military. I would rather loan the Mexican government a few timely Predator drone strikes than trying to change our laws to suit their political purposes.


----------



## justanotherparatrooper (Aug 27, 2006)

Mexico just needs to build a high fence to keep the nasty guns out of their country, perhaps with minefields....and no gates:smug:


----------



## Kilvinsky (Jan 15, 2007)

justanotherparatrooper said:


> Mexico just needs to build a high fence to keep the nasty guns out of their country, perhaps with minefields....and no gates:smug:


Minefields on BOTH sides of the border to make sure those nasty things don't make it south. Then again, all those anti-mine people would oppose this measure.

How about a MIME field? I would avoid going anywhere where MIMES were allowed to fester!

I'm sure the drug cartels would simply used muskets if the automatic weapons didn't get to them. Then the Mexican authorities could EASILLY stop them!


----------

