HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Heidi Heitkamp: Reported ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:20 PM

Heidi Heitkamp: Reported White House Gun Control Plans 'Way In Extreme'

Source: Huffington Post

Democratic Senator Heidi Heitkamp (N.D) told ABC's 'This Week' that gun control plans reportedly being considered by the White House are "way in extreme."

The Washington Post on Saturday reported that the Obama administration is weighing a broad approach to tackling the gun issue. Some of the measures apparently being weighed are universal background checks and stricter penalties for giving guns to a minor or bringing a gun near a school.

Heitkamp, who has an A-rating from the NRA, said that "I think you need to put everything on the table, but what I hear from the administration ó and if the Washington Post is to be believed ó thatís way ó way in extreme of what I think is necessary or even should be talked about. And itís not gonna pass."

She said that addressing the country's failing mental health system should be a bigger priority for Congress.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/06/heidi-heitkamp-gun-control_n_2420775.html



Lieberman may have gone home to Connecticut, but looks like there will always be folks to keep his spirit alive in D.C.

67 replies, 6400 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 67 replies Author Time Post
Reply Heidi Heitkamp: Reported White House Gun Control Plans 'Way In Extreme' (Original post)
Adenoid_Hynkel Jan 2013 OP
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #1
Sunlei Jan 2013 #26
Remmah2 Jan 2013 #2
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #35
Remmah2 Jan 2013 #37
arcane1 Jan 2013 #3
Coyotl Jan 2013 #5
Tempest Jan 2013 #17
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #40
Undismayed Jan 2013 #6
arcane1 Jan 2013 #9
mike dub Jan 2013 #4
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #36
bucolic_frolic Jan 2013 #7
Coyotl Jan 2013 #10
Tempest Jan 2013 #18
NickB79 Jan 2013 #45
frylock Jan 2013 #50
Jennicut Jan 2013 #33
ancianita Jan 2013 #55
Cha Jan 2013 #64
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #8
Mojorabbit Jan 2013 #15
Joe Bacon Jan 2013 #30
Paladin Jan 2013 #32
frazzled Jan 2013 #11
Coyotl Jan 2013 #12
frazzled Jan 2013 #14
DallasNE Jan 2013 #16
frazzled Jan 2013 #19
Joe Bacon Jan 2013 #31
DallasNE Jan 2013 #65
NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #13
CBHagman Jan 2013 #20
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #38
CBHagman Jan 2013 #60
David__77 Jan 2013 #21
KeepinItReal4u Jan 2013 #22
xtraxritical Jan 2013 #24
Remmah2 Jan 2013 #61
KeepinItReal4u Jan 2013 #23
DallasNE Jan 2013 #42
frylock Jan 2013 #51
ancianita Jan 2013 #54
groundloop Jan 2013 #58
Zoeisright Jan 2013 #62
Blue_In_AK Jan 2013 #25
Comrade_McKenzie Jan 2013 #27
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #39
graham4anything Jan 2013 #28
NickB79 Jan 2013 #44
graham4anything Jan 2013 #46
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #47
graham4anything Jan 2013 #49
madrchsod Jan 2013 #29
ancianita Jan 2013 #56
madrchsod Jan 2013 #66
hack89 Jan 2013 #34
DallasNE Jan 2013 #41
NickB79 Jan 2013 #43
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #48
Dems to Win Jan 2013 #52
ButterflyBlood Jan 2013 #53
maxsolomon Jan 2013 #57
Blasphemer Jan 2013 #59
Cha Jan 2013 #63
Odin2005 Jan 2013 #67

Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:24 PM

1. Michael Moore thinks that pharmaceuticals manufactured by Big Pharma is a factor.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #1)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:41 AM

26. Moores probably right, side effects are suicide thoughts,airline people who went nuts were on meds

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:25 PM

2. They have this entire task force working on national gun control?

 

Guess we'll have a gun cabinet in the White House after all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:20 AM

35. If the banksters and the other super-rich want this, we are going to have it.

 

The first AWB was enacted as a result of an unhappy businessman going into a major San Francisco law firm in 1993 and shooting up the place. It was an enclave for the rich and the super-rich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #35)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:24 AM

37. Interesting never thought of it that way.

 

The rich bastard 1%ers and corporate royalty will be the only ones with the ability to fortify their buildings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:29 PM

3. "Heitkamp, who has an A-rating from the NRA" = Buy more guns, we want your money!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:37 PM

5. False characterizations belong on Fox News!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:34 PM

17. What false characterization?

Look at NRA's web site. She received an A rating from them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #17)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:48 AM

40. "What false characterization?" How about your suggestion that she is somehow related to your

 

statement "Buy more guns, we want your money!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:41 PM

6. The gun industry is dwarfed by pretty much any other industry that you can think of.

 

The gun industry is about a $12 billion industry. Just as a comparison, the golf industry is a $195 billion industry. Seems like you have a strong anti-industry bias and will quickly latch that onto any problem you encounter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Undismayed (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:56 PM

9. I am an employee of the banking industry

I know exactly what a dwarfed industry looks like: they show up monthly on our charge-off reports, and they ask us for more money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:37 PM

4. Coming on the heels of the red-state GOP leadership holding up Northeast/Sandy aid...

Here we have a new Senator from a state whose entire population is roughly that of the population of the city of Memphis, slamming gun control plans before they're even laid on the table. The A-rating makes sense; she has the NRA deflection thing down ... just blame the country's failing mental health system...or Hollywood, or videogames. Lame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike dub (Reply #4)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:21 AM

36. "just blame the country's failing mental health system". -- Just check out Michael Moore at #1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:49 PM

7. She should switch parties

she's obviously not a liberal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:57 PM

10. Hello! Have you ever seen her positions! She is a progressive from North Dakota.

Last edited Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:33 PM - Edit history (1)

Where almost every person is a hunter and sane too. Perhaps you want to wait for more details, or do a little homework first, then speak up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #10)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:35 PM

18. Progressive? LOFL!

She's a conservative. Very conservative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #18)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:27 AM

45. Compared to her teabag opponent, she IS progressive

She's from North Dakota, just how much do you think she could push her campaign left and still stay electable?

Unless you'd rather write off large swaths of this country that a moderate Democrat has a chance of winning, simply to be ideologically pure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #45)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:27 PM

50. compared to black, green is white

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:01 AM

33. No, but it's North Dakota. I think for a Dem in that state, that is

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:07 PM

55. She's firing her blue dog shot over the bow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #55)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:49 PM

64. She's certainly firing her NRA shot across the bow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:53 PM

8. Are the NRA supporters in Congress willing to authorize a very large increase in spending on mental

health services without asking for cuts elsewhere?

That's the test. If not, they are not serious about better mental health services.

And I'm not sure that better mental health services will really do much.

That's rather simplistic. We have lots of depressed or even manic people, lots of mentally ill people who would never harm another person, not in their worst moments.

And then you get a sports hero who kills his girlfriend, wife and child.

Better mental health services would help our society but will not prevent gun violence to the extent that it needs to be prevented.

It's a bit of a red herring. Sorry to be a spoilsport, but Republicans won't fund this. They won't follow through on it. And better mental health services will miss the psychopaths some of whom are very good at pulling the wool over the eyes of psychologists, social workers and psychotherapists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #8)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:28 PM

15. When sixty percent of gun deaths are suicides. Improved access

to mental health services might make a huge difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #8)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 08:32 AM

30. Precisely

Here in California, we had an explosion of homeless after Reagan, Deukmejian and Wilson closed the state mental hospitals. And all of them, including Ah-Nold kept cutting mental health services in the state budget. Result--increased crime which led to prisons absorbing some of those who were kicked out of the state hospitals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #8)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 08:44 AM

32. The NRA Politicos Use Mental Health Upgrades As A Dodge, Nothing More.


They're OK with guns falling into the wrong hands, and they're OK with withholding the enormous funding it will take to bring the nation's mental health care system up to an effective access level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:06 PM

11. Oy, and we celebrated her election?

Sigh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:13 PM

12. Like you didn't know this then?

Anyone who knows her, North Dakota, and its people and history would have known this. This is no surprise. Go all the way back to Quinten Burdick, and you will see the record. Sen. Burdick never supported gun control for obvious reasons, that would end a political career in North Dakota.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #12)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:23 PM

14. Times change, even in North Dakota

Just today in the New York Times there's an article about a Korean woman who's bought and brought back to life the local cafe in Minot. My best friend was born and bred in Minot. She is very much for an assault weapons ban and other gun control measures.

People change their minds, too. Gabby Gifford used to be an NRA supporter, too. you can bet that's changed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:31 PM

16. You Bet We Do

Her opponent was a tea bagger. I suppose you don't like Sen. Casey (D-PA) just because he is pro-life. Democrats are a bigger tent than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #16)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:37 PM

19. I understand red state Democrats

I'm just disappointed. Especially because we are in the moment where it is very easy to support basic gun legislation. Other new Dem senators with previous NRA ties are doing it.

And to call these proposed measures "extreme" is ... well ... extreme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #16)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 08:34 AM

31. Bob Casey is a very strong economic liberal

He's going to chair the Joint Economic Committee. I'd rather have Bob Casey as a Senator who crushed Rich Santorum than see Sicky Ricky in his fourth term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe Bacon (Reply #31)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:53 PM

65. That's My Point

While I don't agree with Casey on the abortion issue I am just fine with him as a Senator because I agree with him on much more than I disagree with him on. A different issue but the same applies to the new Democratic Senator from North Dakota.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:13 PM

13. The White House proposals aren't that extreme at all.

I mean shit, closing the gun show/private sale background check loophole is an obvious improvement. It's already the law here in CT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:39 PM

20. Contact info for Heitkamp.

G55 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-2043


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CBHagman (Reply #20)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:30 AM

38. For what purpose, exactly?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #38)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:29 PM

60. Constituents, other voters...

...people who helped get her elected via one form of support or another will want to weigh in.

Moreover, she's newly elected, so the information itself is a recent development.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:52 AM

21. I agree with her. And Lieberman is pro-gun control (F from the NRA).

This new senator from ND is a progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:17 AM

22. Why the new law? CT laws already bans the weapon used.

 

Assault weapons are illegal in CT. but this horrific event still took place

"Sec. 53-202b. Sale or transfer of assault weapon prohibited. Class C felony. (a)(1) Any person who, within this state, distributes, transports or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives any assault weapon, except as provided by sections 29-37j and 53-202a to 53-202k, inclusive, and subsection (h) of section 53a-46a, shall be guilty of a class C felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of which two years may not be suspended or reduced."

source : http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/Chap943.htm#Sec53-202a.htm

CT. has some of the nations strictest laws and not one of them prevented the mentally ill person from committing the crime

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/12/17/connecticut-gun-laws-among-the-nations-strictest/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KeepinItReal4u (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:21 AM

24. Semi automatic is not "assault".

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xtraxritical (Reply #24)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:48 PM

61. They've only been around since about 1911.

 

102 years? Semi-automatics were used for hunting long before WWII.

(Hatcher's Notes.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:19 AM

23. We need hammer and club control

 

FBI reports more people killed with hammers and clubs than rifles and shotguns.

Lets focus on controlling hammers and clubs since they kill more

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/01/03/fbi-hammers-clubs-kill-more-people-than-rifles-shotguns/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KeepinItReal4u (Reply #23)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:00 AM

42. Of Course Nobody Is Talking About Restrictions On Rifles And Shotguns

So what is your point or do you have one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KeepinItReal4u (Reply #23)


Response to KeepinItReal4u (Reply #23)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:03 PM

54. You need to lurk awhile so that you can live up to your moniker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KeepinItReal4u (Reply #23)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:02 PM

58. You should do a little bit better research before posting "facts"

As should the reporter who wrote the piece you linked to. There were 679 deaths from shotguns and rifles, 6220 by handguns, and only 496 from "blunt objects". Also, since when are "blunt objects" the same as hammers and clubs?

Take your bullshit nit-picking of facts somewhere else.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KeepinItReal4u (Reply #23)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:54 PM

62. Didn't major in math, did you?

Let's not forget handguns, the most precious of Precious of gun humpers, which killed almost 7,000 people.

God, what a STUPID post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:27 AM

25. This isn't an unusual position for a senator from a rural western state.

I'm sure Mark Begich is totally in agreement with her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:23 AM

27. Sit down, Heidi. The White House will rattle your cage when it wants your input...

 

And that goes for every gun nut in this party.

We might be a big tent, but it's time to install idiot detectors at the entrances and make the exit signs bigger and brighter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #27)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:32 AM

39. When you run for office and defeat her in an election, then you can tell her, "Sit down, Heidi."

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:38 AM

28. She is the prime example that Bloomberg should finance heavily an anti-NRA, anti-Gun democratic

 

and primary her out next time.

that is why change is going to take 6 years, til everyone is running again, and we can get all the pro-gun people out.

first we have to win the house back, but then primary all of the pro-gun people out
and do so with all the pro-gun in the senate

hope mike bloomberg's staff is keeping tally and notes on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #28)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:23 AM

44. An anti-NRA, anti-gun Democrat in North Dakota? Seriously?

Fuck, short of literally buying votes, how do you expect Bloomberg's money to make a bit of difference there?

Do people simply not realize there are large portions of this country that are strongly against gun control, no matter how much money you spend on election advertisements and radio ads?

that is why change is going to take 6 years, til everyone is running again, and we can get all the pro-gun people out.

first we have to win the house back, but then primary all of the pro-gun people out
and do so with all the pro-gun in the senate


And I'm sure all 80 million gun owners in this country will just sit back and ignore this while it's happening, right? They won't start sending millions of dollars in new contributions to the NRA? All those working-class union members in Ohio that enjoy hunting and shooting, for example, that the Democratic Party relies on, will be just fine with all this?

If I had to make a bet, I'd say that we'll probably have MORE pro-gun members in the House and Senate 6 years from now, because this is starting to look more and more like the 1994 fiasco.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #44)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:30 AM

46. Women nationwide value their kids more than their guns. I would count on them.

 

1994 didn't have social media and didn't have Bloomberg, the Great Equalizer.

candidates in 2014 won't be afraid of the NRA anymore

and we don't need 100%.

Just about a movement of less than 50.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #46)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:59 AM

47. Women nationwide who have been stalked value their right to defend themselves.

 

Some women who have been violently raped now own firearms in their homes.

Imagine that. Who would have thought?

All you have to do is convince them that "it's all the NRA's fault," they should willingly give up their right to defend themselves in their homes, and/or stay home during the next elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #47)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:03 AM

49. Yet the vast majority of rightwing gun people don't value women at all. Especially regarding

 

a woman's rights to an abortion.

Funny thing is

the NRA really is a terrorist organization, and cowards too.
Hiding behind a women, when there million other excuses have now all been debunked.

but again-
even if what you said made any sense(which it doesn't)-
why would someone need to have a gun in the street?

Keep the stinking gun in the house, but why in the street?
Why in a bar, a movie theatre, a shopping center?

You yourself just said all that is needed is for the house.

ah
well
oh
ah
well
yeah
but
no
yeah
oh

what
no

start discussion over trying to make like the question passed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 08:25 AM

29. i thought we have a representative form of government

i thought people had the right to vote for someone who would represent them at the local,state,and federal level. if so, i would say she is representing the people who elected her because they expect her to represent them on many issues concerning their lives.

it would seem that her idea has more weight in solving the problem in north dakota and across america than pissing off the people who voted for her.maybe we don`t need her vote on national issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madrchsod (Reply #29)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:19 PM

56. Why do political positions always have to be constrained by state constituents' interests? Aren't

their interests connectable to those of the rest of the country? Aren't her votes supposed to enact the greatest good for the greatest number? Her state's people can still get their interests served under 'states' rights' positions without pressuring her to impose their values on 49 other states. If a red state Democrat's tenure is that fragile, and job scope that narrowly defined, then the party should push in those states for the country's larger interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #56)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:52 PM

66. agreed.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:01 AM

34. Might as well aim high when you know you will fail

I suspect they are engineering a way to blame the repukes for the failure of reasonable gun control. Politics as usual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:53 AM

41. WaPo Article She Is Using As Basis For Her Comments

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-weighs-broad-gun-control-agenda-in-wake-of-newtown-shootings/2013/01/05/d281efe0-5682-11e2-bf3e-76c0a789346f_story.html

I can't speak for her but suspect she would oppose anything beyond a couple of baby steps like improved background checks that would have done nothing in Newtown, CT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:16 AM

43. And people are surprised by this why exactly?

She's a Democrat from North Dakota, one of the most conservative states in the nation. She represents her constituents first and foremost; without their support she won't get re-elected. And her Democratic and moderate Republican constituents that voted into office are saying "NO" to most new gun control laws.

This pushback will be repeated by other Democrats from Midwestern, Southern, and Southwestern states with high rates of gun ownership, make no mistake. Gun ownership is not solely a Republican domain; millions of gun owners vote Democrat as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #43)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:00 AM

48. "millions of gun owners vote Democrat as well." They do at this time.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:31 PM

52. What's 'way in the extreme' is to shrug off the massacre of first graders and do nothing to prevent

further slaughter.

A. Lanza had access to the best health care money could buy. Mentally disturbed people have always been with us, and will be in the future.

Only in America can the mentally ill get their hands on arsenals of lethal weapons and hundreds of bullets -- in their own basements, no less. Only in America do we have routine, recurrent gun massacres.

As long as Americans have the constitutional right to have arsenals of mass death in their basements, the gun massacres will continue.

No civilized country tolerates routine gun massacres. All Americans who love our country should want America to end the slaughter and join the ranks of civilized countries.

Repeal the blood soaked Second Amendment Now. Then implement REAL, effective gun reform and End the Gun Massacres.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:35 PM

53. Someone from North Dakota is opposed to gun control? REALLY?

Sheesh next thing we might learn that lawmakers from Maine tend to support policies that benefit the lobster fishing industry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:52 PM

57. "way in extreme of what I think... should even be TALKED ABOUT"?

Good to know there will be an open debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:17 PM

59. Well..... duh

The white house has to begin with the most extreme proposal possible knowing full well that it won't pass and it will have to be negotiated down to something that can pass. There's no reason to start with a weak proposal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:48 PM

63. She sounds like a good little

pimp for the nra. Taking the nra against the WH.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adenoid_Hynkel (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 11:49 AM

67. She's a North Dakotan. what do you expect her to say?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread