world

Senate rejects more gun background checks after Calif attack

19 Comments
By ALAN FRAM

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

19 Comments
Login to comment

The senate has chosen. Let the shooting continue.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

If there is a procedure for referendum on the 2nd amendment then the US ought to implement it. I guess the proponents of guns would seek to stop that though.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

@Moonraker I guess the proponents of guns would seek to stop that though.

I think so, too. From what I know the US has an array of radical extremist groups representing most ethnicities, religions and political beliefs. I guess that's one way the US shows equal opportunity.

Here's a link to one kind of extremist group (I've cherrypicked) whose anti-government stance and pro-weapons stance is so strong that they would do whatever they could to keep their guns. Their zeal for their particular freedom also allows the groups they oppose to own weapons.

Will the circle be unbroken? Actually, I think it has already been. Next empire up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_organizations_in_the_United_States

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The vast majority of Americans are good people. Why do several posts try to minimize USA and its people. Guns are a tool for crazed maniacs, others are available. I'm all for improved backround checks. The problem is the occasional good guy gone bad. What can we do about thout?

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

The plan was strongly opposed by the National Rifle Association.

Thursday’s renewal of the issue showed an erosion of support for the proposal in the Republican-run chamber.

Hypocrites. The right bashes Obama for wanting to allow in 10,000 Syrian refugees, but won't even pass legislation that would keep folks on the U.S. "no-fly" list from buying a gun. Why, because the NRA is against it, and Republicans are in mortal fear of the NRA. Over rules even common sense. Maybe the poster who said yesterday that the U.S. is "broken" was right afterall. We have let a "terrorist" group, the NRA, with less than 5 million members, or less than 2% of the U.S. population, turn our great country into a war zone. Disgraceful.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Yes we need to keep the 2nd amendment. But the amendment itself hints at the need for regulation. A line must be drawn somewhere. And if so where do we draw the line. Maybe some believe there should be no line at all and that we should be able to keep and bear grenades and rocket launchers. Since we don't allow those kinds of weapons we obviously have a line in place. I think we need to draw the line at assault weapons. Banning assault weapons and high capacity clips and closing the gun show loopholes will help. Sure it won't stop people from killing each other if they really want to but it will slow them down.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Nothing will change as long as gun supporters have the power to stop it from happening, The end. Just wrap up the victims and move on,

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I'm all for improved backround checks.

You say that, but keep supporting corrupt politicians bought and paid for by the gun industry. This isn't a proposal for an all-out ban. It's for the expanded background checks even you're in favor of. I hope you remember which party decided to do absolutely nothing to stop this insanity when you get to the voting booth.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

By 54-45, senators voted down a proposal by Sen. Dianne Feinstein that would let the government bar sales to people it suspects of being terrorists.

Wow...just...wow...

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The theme du jour among NRA roboslaves is that the no-fly list is too inaccurate to be used for a weapons ban. Now, I wouldn't care a whit whether I were banned from buying a gun, but my life as I know it would end the minute I ended up on that list. If the list is indeed as inaccurate as many in Congress claim, they have an overwhelming responsibility either to ensure its accuracy or to ban the list altogether and to do so posthaste.

Instead, Senate GOPers spent the day voting to defund Planned Parenthood and abolish the ACA. Priorities.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Good!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Anyone who supports what the Senate did here literally put the guns into the hands of the people who did the shooting, since the NRA willingly sells to terrorists and freely admits it, and DEFENDS their right to do so. You helped it happen. Plain and simple. Don't say you're innocent. See you at tomorrow's shooting so you can deny it again.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

It's fair to say that the NRA and their lapdog the Republican party are sponsors of domestic terror.

Nice to see them being shamed for the scum they are.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Madverts: "It's fair to say that the NRA and their lapdog the Republican party are sponsors of domestic terror."

Exactly. It's fact.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

One thing you can say about the US Senate -- it sure is consistent. Consistently DUMB.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This news about republicans voting against background checks being increased does not surprise me. Politicians for the most part only vote in favor of the special interest groups who put money in their wallets. I hate US politics and the political system that has neen hijacked and we the people cant override the system. A massive change in the way laws are passed and enforced is absolutely needed.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I love how liberals all of a sudden support stripping citizens of their rights due to fear-mongering over terrorism. That sound awfully familiar. I take it that liberals support the infamously broad 'no-fly list' as a means of categorizing suspected terrorists as well.

I would also note that California requires background checks.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

since the NRA willingly sells to terrorists and freely admits it

The NRA does not sell guns. The NRA is a non-profit advocacy organization.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The NRA does not sell guns. The NRA is a non-profit advocacy organization.

That somehow has enough money to lobby the hell out of every senator and congressperson that tries to get in their way. Most true non-profit organizations don't have that kind of cash. Remember the saying, "Follow the money." ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites