Jump to content

Can someone explain to a layperson like myself if we have options?


joedav1228
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know alot of 2A hopes were hinging on holding onto majority in either the House or Senate, which didn't happen. I am aware that Democrats have the POTUS chair, Senate and House and in a sense, Republicans sort of have some sway in the Supreme Court.
As an average person without alot of in-depth knowledge of politics, I am honest to goodness losing sleep over the ordeal expecting Biden to be able to pass anything he can dream up with 0 opposition but then I read a good amount of posts explaining several options that we may still have that provide a chance of life here. Stuff about filibusters, Democrats would need several Republicans to side with them (why is this), several Democrats that may not go along with their party and a few other ideas.
Is there any truth to these things I hear, is the 2A fight not just as simple as "Democrats have the big chair, Senate & House so everything is hopeless"?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember, a simple senate majority won't do. For trivialities, maybe, but not for big stuff. In early 2013 O had the senate, and could not ram gun control through, so do not give up.
A 51 to 50 vote isn't enough.

Hope the constitution stands, otherwise
Dig a hole somewhere(find somewhere legal to store if it comes), or most of us are going to be felons, maybe for years while waiting, hoping the supremes overturn the cases. Because that is what is going to play out in that situation.
It won't do any good yelling out "but muh 2A" from the wrong side of a cell door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I know alot of 2A hopes were hinging on holding onto majority in either the House or Senate, which didn't happen. I am aware that Democrats have the POTUS chair, Senate and House and in a sense, Republicans sort of have some sway in the Supreme Court.
As an average person without alot of in-depth knowledge of politics, I am honest to goodness losing sleep over the ordeal expecting Biden to be able to pass anything he can dream up with 0 opposition but then I read a good amount of posts explaining several options that we may still have that provide a chance of life here. Stuff about filibusters, Democrats would need several Republicans to side with them (why is this), several Democrats that may not go along with their party and a few other ideas.
Is there any truth to these things I hear, is the 2A fight not just as simple as "Democrats have the big chair, Senate & House so everything is hopeless"?

 

 

They have threatened to eliminate the filibuster if they take control of the Senate. With crazy, unAmerican stuff like this, they are generally as good as their word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember, a simple senate majority won't do. For trivialities, maybe, but not for big stuff. In early 2013 O had the senate, and could not ram gun control through, so do not give up.

A 51 to 50 vote isn't enough.

This is what really grabs my interest. I am going to do some reading on how that sort of thing would work. Is there a term for that kind of thing, like where 1 party has all 3 positions of power but they still run into issues trying to pass laws? It's nice to know that there are some sort of small level of checks and balances in place. It makes sense because 1 party has had all 3 positions of power in the past and why didn't they just go crazy back then? I understand the concept and theory of things but when it comes to the detailed specifics I just don't know that level of in depth knowledge.

 

 

I'm not sure myself, just something I've read.

They have threatened to eliminate the filibuster if they take control of the Senate. With crazy, unAmerican stuff like this, they are generally as good as their word.

 

 

Is it true that Democrats would be a little worried about doing away with the filliibuster thing and packing the courts because if they do it would benefit the republicans when the tables are turned and it would also feed into the idea that the Dem's are power hungry, can't be trusted and willing to do anything to seize power and hold onto it etc?

 

I'm not sure myself, just something I've read.

Edited by joedav1228
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I know alot of 2A hopes were hinging on holding onto majority in either the House or Senate, which didn't happen. I am aware that Democrats have the POTUS chair, Senate and House and in a sense, Republicans sort of have some sway in the Supreme Court.
As an average person without alot of in-depth knowledge of politics, I am honest to goodness losing sleep over the ordeal expecting Biden to be able to pass anything he can dream up with 0 opposition but then I read a good amount of posts explaining several options that we may still have that provide a chance of life here. Stuff about filibusters, Democrats would need several Republicans to side with them (why is this), several Democrats that may not go along with their party and a few other ideas.
Is there any truth to these things I hear, is the 2A fight not just as simple as "Democrats have the big chair, Senate & House so everything is hopeless"?

 

 

They have threatened to eliminate the filibuster if they take control of the Senate. With crazy, unAmerican stuff like this, they are generally as good as their word.

 

Changing the rules of the Senate would require at least 51 votes. Remember the vice president doesn't vote except to break ties. So all 50 Democrats would have to vote for it. (Here's hoping no Republican would).

 

One of the fifty Democrats is Joe Manchin, from West Virginia. Manchin (if he decides to run) is a up for re-election in 2022, from a state that went for Trump by almost 39 points last November. I'm thinking he'll consider that when he votes.

 

Another Democrat is Jon Testor, from Montana (not up for re-election until 2024). Trump won Montana by around 16 points.

 

It's not a slam dunk for the Democrats.

Edited by springfield shooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manchin talks a good game but will stand with the Leftist like he always has. Especially now, with the Leftist drooling knowing they are a stones throw away from passing all they ever wanted. I wish it wasn't so, but they have told us over and over again, of what they would do to America if they where in power. Sadly, you may get a few Rino's to cross over.

Edited by Sweeper13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manchin talks a good game but will stand with the Leftist like he always has. Especially now, with the Leftist drooling knowing they are a stones throw away from passing all they ever wanted. I wish it wasn't so, but they have told us over and over again, of what they would do to America if they where in power. Sadly, you may get a few Rino's to cross over.

Here's hoping his state holds him accountable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manchin talks a good game but will stand with the Leftist like he always has. Especially now, with the Leftist drooling knowing they are a stones throw away from passing all they ever wanted. I wish it wasn't so, but they have told us over and over again, of what they would do to America if they where in power. Sadly, you may get a few Rino's to cross over.

I agree. I'm betting Olympia Snow and Susan Collins to fall in line with the Democrats first followed quickly by Mittens Romney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless Im mistaken, and someone will quickly point out if Im wrong or unless they change the Senate rules, it requires 60 votes to pass anything other than a bill dealing with money or the judiciary.

 

I have no doubts on whether they will change the rules though, after all thats what got us here in the first place.

60 votes is needed to invoke cloture, which will bring an end to debate. It's typically used to end filibusters. Bills are still be passed by a simple majority under normal conditions. The whole "needing 60 votes" concept is that the 60 votes are needed to bring about a vote in the first place. So, unless the Senate changes the rules anything that comes up in the Senate that R's don't like will get filibustered until/unless the Dems execute the so-called nuclear option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relax.

 

If you’re old enough, you will recognize patterns in politics and the economy. Things expand, things contract. Sometimes in sync, sometimes not. Some politicians and agendas over-reach. Then they blow it.

 

In the long run, everything returns to the mean and much remains the same. It’s only in our sense of “now” that the world suddenly looks more perilous, this election is the most important in our lifetimes (heard that before?), “they” are gonna do this to “us”.

 

Take the long view, take a walk, talk to real people in your lives, don’t let the internet get in the way of enjoying your life. More time with real people is always better and less isolating than time in siloed internet echo chambers.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relax.

 

If you’re old enough, you will recognize patterns in politics and the economy. Things expand, things contract. Sometimes in sync, sometimes not. Some politicians and agendas over-reach. Then they blow it.

 

In the long run, everything returns to the mean and much remains the same. It’s only in our sense of “now” that the world suddenly looks more perilous, this election is the most important in our lifetimes (heard that before?), “they” are gonna do this to “us”.

 

Take the long view, take a walk, talk to real people in your lives, don’t let the internet get in the way of enjoying your life. More time with real people is always better and less isolating than time in siloed internet echo chambers.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

\ purple on / With such a positive outlook, why would you leave the great state of Illinois. \ purple off/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relax. If you’re old enough, you will recognize patterns in politics and the economy. Things expand, things contract. Sometimes in sync, sometimes not. Some politicians and agendas over-reach. Then they blow it. In the long run, everything returns to the mean and much remains the same. It’s only in our sense of “now” that the world suddenly looks more perilous, this election is the most important in our lifetimes (heard that before?), “they” are gonna do this to “us”. Take the long view, take a walk, talk to real people in your lives, don’t let the internet get in the way of enjoying your life. More time with real people is always better and less isolating than time in siloed internet echo chambers. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The way you explained things is how I view just about everything in my daily life. I try to take a step back, look in from the outside and try to consider everything before and everything after so as to not get overly hyped. I just wish I knew more about the political system, every time I think I have a grasp I just learn a new way to work around what I thought were simple black and white rules. There seems to be alot of grey area when it comes to this stuff.

 

The whole 50 votes & 60 votes stuff will make for good research this morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really helpful, I am reading it now and also bookmarked it. Thank you.

 

I may going really far off on a tangent here but can they use the method you provided in your link to pass a federal budget law of some sort with the condition of gun control being something is a byproduct? This way they hide the gun control as just a sub section of dealing with the budget? I ask because I've always heard of gun control being a subset of a law being passed and the 2A stuff being hidden. I know I am likely incorrect but I was just thinking of some weird against the norm method.

 

BTW - I posted this same question on Reddit and the following was one of the answers. It may be common knowledge to many of you but I'd like to post it just incase there is another person like myself with limited (but growing) knowledge of the matter:

 

*********************

Under current Senate rules, most legislation must have 60 Senate votes in order to pass. The minority can use the filibuster to prevent anything with less from proceeding.
There are a few implications of Dems having Senate control.
When a bill is submitted in the Senate, its first stop is a Senate committee. When the GOP controls the Senate, they control the committees, and can kill a bill without it ever hearing a full vote on the Senate floor. Dems can now force Republicans to kill bills in the light of day rather than in committee. Not really that big of a deal but it's a negative.
They could also vote to change the rules to eliminate the filibuster. At present, it doesn't appear that they have the votes to do this. They would need every Democrat and Independent on board, and right now they don't have it. Joe Manchin of West Virginia has been adamant that he would not support it. There are a few others who have opposed it in less recent and emphatic terms than he has, but they seem like they are probably at least a few votes shy.
There's one piece of gun control legislation that I think you could see passing - The Manchin-Toomey background check law. It's a Manchin pet project, has some Republican support, and is broadly popular. Senate Republicans might throw Manchin a bone on that one. It would prohibit off-paper private sales at gun shows and through classified ads.
Aside from that I don't see them passing anything unless some seats change hands.
Come 2022 the GOP has the edge to take the House and has cause for optimism for taking back the Senate. If they take either chamber then gun control is off the table again.
Edited by joedav1228
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After Republicans eliminated the filibuster to force through the latest supreme court nominee, there is a high probability that dems will eliminate the filibuster entirely to force through everything they can.

There is maybe 1 dem that might side with us on a few issues, there are also 2-3 repubs that would side with dems. In either case we lose on most issues.

There's very little we can do. Our real options were to control 1 of the houses of congress or the presidency. We failed to do that.

The last line of defense is the supreme court, but they have shown little interest in getting involved in 2a issues. Even if they take a case, there is no telling how they would rule and if they rule in our favor, the dems could turn around and pack the court and we would lose that option as well.

I think our hope is that dems prioritize other issues (taxes, covid, climate change, dreamers, student debt forgiveness) and that keeps them busy for 2 years until we can hopefully win an election. If any major mass shootings occur in the mean time, they will pass most gun control laws in days not weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manchin went live on CNN the other day professing he was at the gun range himself not too long before he had the interview and was adamant responsible gun ownership was paramount and that additional gun control was a non-starter. I know this because I watched it myself.

 

Biden has an agenda and so does the Democratic party. with everything going on right now and knowing full well the party holds the tiniest of margins, I'm going out on a limb here and say that this Pretty safe right now with the current make-up if congress. At least at the federal level.

 

If anything personally you should be concerned more with what nonsense they try to pull in Springfield this spring, as is seemingly always the case, year after year.

Edited by hceuterpe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's the recent Jake Tapper interview, he concluded by contradicting himself when he said, "“We’re not going to take guns away, but there should be things people should not have in their hands."


He was also one of the chief sponsors of the Toomey-Manchin bill to expand background checks. At the time, he told us ""I've said this, if you're a law-abiding gun owner, you'll love this bill." None of us did.


He's better than some, but I wouldn't trust him very much.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relax. If you’re old enough, you will recognize patterns in politics and the economy. Things expand, things contract. Sometimes in sync, sometimes not. Some politicians and agendas over-reach. Then they blow it. In the long run, everything returns to the mean and much remains the same. It’s only in our sense of “now” that the world suddenly looks more perilous, this election is the most important in our lifetimes (heard that before?), “they” are gonna do this to “us”. Take the long view, take a walk, talk to real people in your lives, don’t let the internet get in the way of enjoying your life. More time with real people is always better and less isolating than time in siloed internet echo chambers. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Words of wisdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After Republicans eliminated the filibuster to force through the latest supreme court nominee, there is a high probability that dems will eliminate the filibuster entirely to force through everything they can.

There is maybe 1 dem that might side with us on a few issues, there are also 2-3 repubs that would side with dems. In either case we lose on most issues.

There's very little we can do. Our real options were to control 1 of the houses of congress or the presidency. We failed to do that.

The last line of defense is the supreme court, but they have shown little interest in getting involved in 2a issues. Even if they take a case, there is no telling how they would rule and if they rule in our favor, the dems could turn around and pack the court and we would lose that option as well.

I think our hope is that dems prioritize other issues (taxes, covid, climate change, dreamers, student debt forgiveness) and that keeps them busy for 2 years until we can hopefully win an election. If any major mass shootings occur in the mean time, they will pass most gun control laws in days not weeks.

 

A Democrat, Henry reed, was the one who pushed that change and the Democrats voted it in under Obama.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/harry-reid-democrats-filibuster_n_58499b9de4b04002fa8039c4

https://time.com/5324365/harry-reid-filibuster-reform-supreme-court/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

After Republicans eliminated the filibuster to force through the latest supreme court nominee, there is a high probability that dems will eliminate the filibuster entirely to force through everything they can.

There is maybe 1 dem that might side with us on a few issues, there are also 2-3 repubs that would side with dems. In either case we lose on most issues.

There's very little we can do. Our real options were to control 1 of the houses of congress or the presidency. We failed to do that.

The last line of defense is the supreme court, but they have shown little interest in getting involved in 2a issues. Even if they take a case, there is no telling how they would rule and if they rule in our favor, the dems could turn around and pack the court and we would lose that option as well.

I think our hope is that dems prioritize other issues (taxes, covid, climate change, dreamers, student debt forgiveness) and that keeps them busy for 2 years until we can hopefully win an election. If any major mass shootings occur in the mean time, they will pass most gun control laws in days not weeks.

 

A Democrat, Henry reed, was the one who pushed that change and the Democrats voted it in under Obama.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/harry-reid-democrats-filibuster_n_58499b9de4b04002fa8039c4

https://time.com/5324365/harry-reid-filibuster-reform-supreme-court/

 

 

Harry Reid pushed through (via the process of reconciliation) the elimination of the filibuster for most presidential nominees, (but not to SCOTUS) in 2013. Mitch McConnell then did the same for SCOTUS nominees in 2017.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's the recent Jake Tapper interview, he concluded by contradicting himself when he said, "“We’re not going to take guns away, but there should be things people should not have in their hands."
He was also one of the chief sponsors of the Toomey-Manchin bill to expand background checks. At the time, he told us ""I've said this, if you're a law-abiding gun owner, you'll love this bill." None of us did.
He's better than some, but I wouldn't trust him very much.

He is a "politician". As of yet, I haven't seen any that could be called "trustworthy".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is alot to worry about. The Dems are going to get rid of the filibuster as a payback to McConnell for 3 SCOTUS Justices. We have at least 3 extremely weak Repubs, the leader of the pack is Mitt Romney, who already as Governor signed into law an AWB. Trump election wins mean "0," the Repubs are trying to rid their image of Trump before he even leaves office. Gun control will go like this:

1. Universal background checks ✔

2. Gun Shows ✔

3. Online Gun Sales ✔

With enough Repub support:

1. Full AWB like Feinstein's 2013 bill that failed. The Ol' Timers will clearly school you on the '94 AWB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...