It means what I think it means. You think support for background checks means support for the Senate Democrats bill. You, and many others, have suggested that support for universal background checks implies a certain way to do them. I disagree, while supporting the idea of universal background checks, I wanted less potential negative outcomes for people who lose the paperwork or were gifting guns to friends and family. I was willing to compromise, democrats wouldn't come the extra few steps and make the deal. They could have had the votes. They only missed it by 2 or 3. They decided not to finish the negotiations. I can't blame them
Its just that the gun lobby and myself might not hate the idea but we don't think it will do much. It was the Senate democrats baby. By not getting background checks we didn't feel like we've lost anything. We are in the same place that we were before. None of the provisions would have prevented the past shootings.
We can start over in the House and push for new gun laws on our terms. Maybe for certain concessions we will add another background checks bill and a trafficking provision in there. Remember, we werent the ones who wanted to rush into this for emotional reasons or hysteria. You guys did. Its a bit disingenuous to suggest that our side is the only wailing, mob mentality, emotional horde on this one
How is it on your high horse, mastering others and getting countless reasonable things done, btw? I do appreciate that blaming the NRA has fit into your busy schedule of blaming the GOP for bad weather and tooth decay.
On the flip side, you were right about how little support the awb and mag limits had in the Senate. I gradually did the count and agreed with you, if you recall.
Bookmarks