The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: ABX on April 16, 2019, 08:14:32 pm
-
Remember when conservatives defended the second and fourth amendments? Pepperidge Farm remembers.
"We need to take the guns first, due process comes later..." -Nancy Pelosi
.....The Democrat controlled House has wasted no time passing gun control legislation over to the Republican-led upper chamber.
Now, the U.S. Senate is holding hearings on the so-called red flag gun confiscation bill, S.7, on Tuesday, a bill which has bipartisan support from Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and Democrat Senator Richard Blumenthal......
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/ted-cruz-caves-on-red-flag-laws-tx-house-reps-silent-on-second-amendment-betrayal/
-
I decided that before I got all excited, I would go read what Cruz actually said. This is hard to read, and what the protestor is saying is interspersed.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?458685-1/law-enforcement-mental-health-officials-testify-proposed-gun-legislation&start=4634 (https://www.c-span.org/video/?458685-1/law-enforcement-mental-health-officials-testify-proposed-gun-legislation&start=4634)
IT'S VITALLY IMPORTANT. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR WORK, ALL OF YOU. THANK YOU. >>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU TO EACH OF THE WITNESSES FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND FOR TESTIFYING. THE NATIONAL EPIDEMIC WE HAVE OF MASS SHOOTINGS AND SCHOOL SHOOTINGS IS A TRAGEDY AND IT IS ONE THAT I BELIEVE WE NEED TO DO SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TO PREVENT. THE STATE OF TEXAS, TRAGICALLY, HAS EXPERIENCED THIS RECENTLY IN HORRIFIC INSTANCES IN BOTH SUTHERLAND SPRINGS AND IN SANTA FE. I WAS IN SUTHERLAND SPRINGS AND SANTA FE IN THE HOURS FOLLOWING THOSE -- >> END GUN TERROR! END GUN TERROR! >> PLEASE, SIT DOWN OR BE REMOVED. >> THANK YOU! THANK YOU GENTLEMANJACINDA ARDEN FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP. END GUN TERROR! ASSAULT WEAPONS ASSAULT PEOPLE! ENOUGH! DO SOMETHING! FOLLOW THE LEADERSHIP OF PRIME MINISTER ARDEN. DO SOMETHING! PEOPLE ARE DYING! YOU'RE KILLING THEM! >> YOU WILL GET A MINUTE BACK, AND YOU WILL CONTINUE. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. AS I SAID, I WAS IN SANTA FE. I WAS IN SUTHERLAND SPRINGS IN THE HOURS FOLLOWING THOSE SHOOTINGS AND WHAT HAPPENED THERE WAS TRULY HORRIFIC. SUTHERLAND SPRINGS IS FRUSTRATING, BECAUSE THAT CRIME IN PARTICULAR WAS EASILY PREVENTIBLE. THE SHOOTER IN SUTHERLAND SPRINGS, IT WAS ALREADY DOUBLY ILLEGAL FOR HIM TO PURCHASE A FIREARM. HE HAD A FELONY CONVICTION, AND HE HAD A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CONVICTION, AS WELL AS MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES. BUT IN THAT INSTANCE, THE SHOOTER LIED ABOUT HIS CONVICTIONS WHEN HE PURCHASED HIS FIREARMS, AND TRAGICALLY, THE AIR FORCE UNDER THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION NEVER REPORTED HIS FELONY CONVICTIONS TO THE BACKGROUND CHECK DATABASE. WE NEED TO DO MUCH MORE. AND IN PARTICULAR, I WOULD URGE THIS COMMITTEE TO TAKE UP AND FINALLY PASS LEGISLATION THAT I FILED OVER SIX YEARS AGO, THE GRASSLEY/CRUZ LEGISLATION THAT I FAILED WITH THE FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THIS COMMITTEE THAT TARGETS RESOURCES ON BAD GUYS, ON FELONS AND FUGITIVES THAT WOULD HAVE AUDITED EVERY FEDERAL AGENCY TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE FELONIES ARE REPORTED TO THE BACKGROUND CHECK DATABASE, WHICH WOULD HAVE MEANT THE SUTHERLAND SPRINGS SHOOTER WOULD HAVE HAD HIS CONVICTION IN THE DATABASE. BUT ALSO CRITICALLY, THAT MANDATES PROSECUTING THE FELONS AND FUGITIVES WHO TRY TO ILLEGALLY BUY FIREARMS. EVERY YEAR, TENS OF THOUSANDS OF FELONS AND FUGITIVES GO IN, TRY TO ILLEGALLY BUY FIREARMS AND MOST OF THEM ARE NOT PROSECUTED. HAD GRASSLEY/CRUZ PASSED INTO LAW, THAT SHOOTER WHEN HE LIED ON THAT FORM AND COMMITTED ANOTHER FELONY, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN PROSECUTED, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN A FEDERAL PRISON AND HE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN IN THAT BEAUTIFUL CHURCH MURDERING THOSE INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE. THERE IS A GREAT DEAL MORE WE SHOULD DO, BUT THE RIGHT APPROACH, I THINK, IS TARGETING AND FOCUSING ON BAD GUYS. AND I DO THINK THAT EXTREME RISK LAWS OF THE KIND WE'RE DISCUSSING CAN POTENTIALLY BE PART OF THE SOLUTION SET. THAT TARGETING THOSE THAT POSE AN EXTREME RISK THAT HAVE SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS AND POSE A THREAT TO THEMSELVES OR OTHERS IS A LAW ENFORCEMENT TOOL THAT CAN BE HELPFUL IN PREVENTING CRIMES OF VIOLENCE. NOW, AS HAS BEEN NOTED BY SEVERAL WITNESSES, POLICYMAKERS HAVE TO BALANCE THE NEED TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC SAFETY WITH ALSO THE OBLIGATION TO PROTECT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND TO PROTECT CIVIL RIGHTS. AND SO,
-
I decided that before I got all excited, I would go read what Cruz actually said. This is hard to read, and what the protestor is saying is interspersed.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?458685-1/law-enforcement-mental-health-officials-testify-proposed-gun-legislation&start=4634 (https://www.c-span.org/video/?458685-1/law-enforcement-mental-health-officials-testify-proposed-gun-legislation&start=4634)
@Sanguine
Thanks for clearing that up.
-
You're so welcome, Pete.
-
I decided that before I got all excited, I would go read what Cruz actually said. This is hard to read, and what the protestor is saying is interspersed.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?458685-1/law-enforcement-mental-health-officials-testify-proposed-gun-legislation&start=4634 (https://www.c-span.org/video/?458685-1/law-enforcement-mental-health-officials-testify-proposed-gun-legislation&start=4634)
What I get out of that is that Cruz's proposal is to make sure the existing gun laws are actually followed, rather than any new regulation.
-
What I get out of that is that Cruz's proposal is to make sure the existing gun laws are actually followed, rather than any new regulation.
That's what I'm reading.
-
Video of Ted Cruz at Committee Hearing in March:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4787987/ted-cruz-supports-potential-red-flag-laws (https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4787987/ted-cruz-supports-potential-red-flag-laws)
-
That's what I'm reading.
In the first sentence of the first paragraph "Senator Cruz appears to have ... with the key word being appears. In another paragraph ... Cruz seemingly... with the key word seemingly. Nothing definitive.
Thanks @Sanguine for providing what was actually stated.
-
Misleading headline. Cruz hater?
-
caved...
...be sure to goggle up the quality unbiased journalism....
If there isn't significant news, expect somebody is hard working,
to twist something, and make sone "news"
-
Why was a three week old article like this even dug up?
-
Why was a three week old article like this even dug up?
I'd like to know why BigLeaguePolitics wrote this this way in the first place?