Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
24. The guy with a D minus rating from the NRA? Let's look at his history, shall we?
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:57 PM
Feb 2016
Sanders voted against the pro-gun-control Brady Bill, writing that he believes states, not the federal government, can handle waiting periods for handguns. In 1994, he voted yes on an assault weapons ban. He has voted to ban some lawsuits against gun manufacturers and for the Manchin-Toomey legislation expanding federal background checks.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm


I want to shield gun shops from lawsuits, not manufacturers

Q: For a decade, you said that holding gun manufacturers legally responsible for mass shootings is a bad idea. Do you want to shield gun companies from lawsuits?

SANDERS: Of course not. This was a large and complicated bill. There were provisions in it that I think made sense. For example, do I think that a gun shop in the state of Vermont that sells legally a gun to somebody, and that somebody goes out and does something crazy, that that gun shop owner should be held responsible? I don't. On the other hand, where you have manufacturers and where you have gun shops knowingly giving guns to criminals or aiding and abetting that, of course we should take action.

Source: 2015 CNN Democratic primary debate in Las Vegas , Oct 13, 2015

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm


Bernie Sanders’ critics misfire: The Vermont senator’s gun record is better than it looks

....However, the Nation and the other reports like it don’t shed real light on where Sanders is coming from. They don’t explain why he supports some gun controls but not others. Nor do they ask if there’s a consistency to Sanders’ positions and votes over the years? They simply suggest that Bernie’s position is muddled and makes a good target for Hillary.

Yet there is an explanation. It’s consistent and simpler than many pundits think. And it’s in Bernie’s own words dating back to the campaign where he was first elected to the U.S. House—in 1990—where he was endorsed by the NRA, even after Sanders told them that he would ban assault rifles. That year, Bernie faced Republican incumbent Peter Smith, who beat him by less than 4 percentage points in a three-way race two years before.

In that 1988 race, Bernie told Vermont sportsmen that he backed an assault weapons ban. Smith told the same sportsmen’s groups that he opposed it, but midway through his first term he changed his mind and co-sponsored an assault rifle ban—even bringing an AK-47 to his press conference. That about-face was seen as a betrayal and is the background to a June 1990 debate sponsored by the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs.

I was at that debate with Smith and three other candidates—as the Sanders’ campaign press secretary—and recorded it. Bernie spoke at length three times and much of what he said is relevant today, and anticipates his congressional record on gun control ever since. Look at how Bernie describes what being a sportsperson is in a rural state, where he is quick to draw the line with weapons that threaten police and have no legitimate use in hunting—he previously was mayor of Vermont’s biggest city, and his record of being very clear with the gun lobby and rural people about where he stands. His approach, despite the Nation’s characterization, isn’t “open-minded.”

As you can see, Bernie—who moved to rural northeastern Vermont in the late 1960s—has an appreciation and feeling for where hunting and fishing fit into the lives of lower income rural people. He’s not a hunter or a fisherman. When he grew up in Brooklyn, he was a nerdy jock—being captivated by ideas and a high school miler who hoped for a track scholarship for college. But like many people who settled in Vermont for generations, he was drawn to its freer and greener pastures and respected its local culture.

“I went before the sportsmen of Vermont and said that I have concerns about certain types of assault weapons that have nothing to do with hunting. I believe in hunting. I will not support any legislation that limits the rights of Vermonters or any other hunters to practice what they have enjoyed for decades. I do have concerns about certain types of assault weapons.”

That was not the end of his remarks. But it is worth noting that his separating the rights of traditional hunters from the concerns of police chiefs has been a constant thread in many subsequent votes he would take in Congress. It’s also noteworthy that Bernie consistently has opposed assault weapons from the late 1980s—before he was in Congress—which he reiterated to the moderator.

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/10/what_bernies_gun_control_critics_get_wrong_partner/


Alternet: Bernie's Gun Control Critics Are Wrong—His Stance Has Been Consistent for Decades

Next, the 1990 debate turned to gun control. The moderator, who clearly was a Second Amendment absolutist, went after Bernie—to test his mettle after Smith’s about-face.

“Do you support additional restrictions on firearms? Do you support additional restrictive firearms legislation?” he asked. “Bernie Sanders, explain yourself, yes or no?”

“Yes,” he replied. “Two years ago, I went before the Vermont Sportsman’s Federation and was asked exactly the same question. It was a controversial question. I know how they felt on the issue. And that was before the DiConcini Bill. That was before a lot of discussion about the Brady Bill. That was before New Jersey and California passed bills limiting assault weapons.

“I went before the sportsmen of Vermont and said that I have concerns about certain types of assault weapons that have nothing to do with hunting. I believe in hunting. I will not support any legislation that limits the rights of Vermonters or any other hunters to practice what they have enjoyed for decades. I do have concerns about certain types of assault weapons.”


That was not the end of his remarks. But it is worth noting that his separating the rights of traditional hunters from the concerns of police chiefs has been a constant thread in many subsequent votes he would take in Congress. It’s also noteworthy that Bernie consistently has opposed assault weapons from the late 1980s—before he was in Congress—which he reiterated to the moderator.

“I said that before the election,” he continued. “The Vermont sportspeople, as is their right, made their endorsement. The endorsed Peter Smith. They endorsed Paul Poirier. I lost that election by about three-and-one-half percentage points, a very close election. Was my failure to get that endorsement pivotal? It might have been. We don’t know. Maybe it was. Maybe it wasn’t. All I can say is I told the sportspeople of Vermont what I believe before the election and I am going to say it again.

“I do believe we need to ban certain types of assault weapons. I have taked to police chiefs. I have talked to the police officers out on the street. I have read some of the literature all over this country. Police chiefs, police officers are concerned about the types of weapons which are ending up in the hands of drug dealers and other criminals and our police oficers are getting outgunned.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernies-gun-control-critics-are-wrong-his-stance-has-been-consistent-decades


Sanders Votes for Background Checks, Assault Weapons Ban

WASHINGTON, April 17 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today voted for expanded background checks on gun buyers and for a ban on assault weapons but the Senate rejected those central planks of legislation inspired by the shootings of 20 first-grade students and six teachers in Newtown, Conn.

“Nobody believes that gun control by itself is going to end the horrors we have seen in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., Blacksburg, Va., Tucson, Ariz. and other American communities,” Sanders said. “There is a growing consensus, however, in Vermont and across America that we have got to do as much as we can to end the cold-blooded, mass murders of innocent people. I believe very strongly that we also have got to address the mental health crisis in our country and make certain that help is available for people who may be a danger to themselves and others,” Sanders added.

The amendment on expanded background checks needed 60 votes to pass but only 54 senators voted for it. “To my mind it makes common sense to keep these weapons out of the hands of people with criminal records or mental health histories,” Sanders said.

Under current federal law, background checks are not performed for tens of thousands of sales – up to 40 percent of all gun transfers – at gun shows or over the Internet. The amendment would have required background checks for all gun sales in commercial settings regardless of whether the seller is a licensed dealer. The compromise proposal would have exempted sales between “family, friends, and neighbors.”

In a separate roll call, the Senate rejected a proposal to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. That proposal was defeated by a vote of 60 to 40.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-votes-for-background-checks-assault-weapons-ban


Bernie Sanders voted for the 1994 crime bill because it included the Violence against Women Act and assault weapons ban:

In 1994, however, Sanders voted in favor of the final version of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, a bill that expanded the federal death penalty. Sanders had voted for an amendment to the bill that would have replaced all federal death sentences with life in prison. Even though the amendment failed, Sanders still voted for the larger crime bill.

A spokesman for Sanders said he voted for the bill "because it included the Violence Against Women Act and the ban on certain assault weapons."

Sanders reiterated his opposition to capital punishment in 2015. "I just don’t think the state itself, whether it’s the state government or federal government, should be in the business of killing people," he said on a radio show.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/02/viral-image/where-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-stand-/


If he's a pro-NRA/pro-gun industry shill why did the NRA give him a lifetime D- rating?
Yes! leftofcool Feb 2016 #1
YES!!!!!!!!!!! boston bean Feb 2016 #2
I do not. JRLeft Feb 2016 #3
I figured there was some !! Makes your support of bernie boston bean Feb 2016 #4
That's why I support him, he's for an assault weapons ban I am not. JRLeft Feb 2016 #6
Some? In my NJ middle class Democratic hamlet of 60,000--50% of households own firearms. TheBlackAdder Feb 2016 #56
Thank you, by the NRA is a place where you can get discounts on ammo and weapons. JRLeft Feb 2016 #67
Yes. Long overdue. n/t livetohike Feb 2016 #5
exactly...FIRE THE GOP, SINK THE NRA, GUN CONTROL IS COMING, COMING TO THE USA mgmaggiemg Feb 2016 #7
Yes! Cali_Democrat Feb 2016 #8
Yep. We need scalia's literal reading of the constitution overturned. boston bean Feb 2016 #9
No, we don't. JRLeft Feb 2016 #11
So you think Scalia was a good justice dsc Feb 2016 #13
No, but our guns should not be taken away. Background checks and the closing of the gun show JRLeft Feb 2016 #19
Who wants to take away the guns you own?? boston bean Feb 2016 #23
It's been mentioned many times on this board. JRLeft Feb 2016 #25
I mention it sometimes because I wouldnt shed a tear if no one on this country had a gun. boston bean Feb 2016 #48
It's a hobby of mine, I love going to the range. I do not consume animals or animal byproducts. JRLeft Feb 2016 #54
No matter how you use it its use is to kill. boston bean Feb 2016 #59
Good luck with your dream, it's never going to happen. JRLeft Feb 2016 #61
Right. So your argument to not have a no quarter for NRA litmus test boston bean Feb 2016 #64
this getting fun. Never expected this kind of disagreement from liberals boston bean Feb 2016 #17
Disagree. Let me elaborate. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #10
I find it intelligent to recognize the NRA has no good ideas. boston bean Feb 2016 #12
I find it the most unintelligent form of politics to declare opposition to an unknown quantity. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #16
Maybe if you like the NRA. Do you? boston bean Feb 2016 #18
Nope. I disagree with them on most things. I just prefer a more intelligent politics. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #26
"I just prefer a more intelligent politics." beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #28
Why thank you! JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #40
Back atcha, friend! beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #49
So the fella ultimately made an intelligent decision? boston bean Feb 2016 #29
Did I say I disagreed with the PLCAA? No, you seem to have assumed that. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #32
You never said. But your responses were leading both ways. boston bean Feb 2016 #34
So in the face of what appeared to you to be conflicting information, you simply picked one? JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #35
I based my responses on both. boston bean Feb 2016 #37
Okay, that is just funny. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #38
. boston bean Feb 2016 #52
Others clearly do differ. Good on you though. Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #51
And there you have it. ^^^ Eleanors38 Feb 2016 #73
Let's hope Hillary can honor the position she UglyGreed Feb 2016 #14
Is Hillary out of the duck blind with her six shooters now? Political expediency demanded it. Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #53
Rec. nt LexVegas Feb 2016 #15
Is that this year's Hillary or the 2008 version who bragged about her history with guns? beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #20
What were Bernies pro NRA votes again? What were Hillary's? boston bean Feb 2016 #22
The guy with a D minus rating from the NRA? Let's look at his history, shall we? beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #24
The guy who voted for the most important legislation for the gun lobby. boston bean Feb 2016 #31
The guy who stood up to the NRA repeatedly and got an F grade 5 years in a row because of it? beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #33
Who voted five times against the brady bill. boston bean Feb 2016 #41
Who still stood up to the NRA. Repeatedly. And faced a backlash when they backed his opponents. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #42
Who voted to allow guns on trains? boston bean Feb 2016 #43
In checked baggage. Try to stick to the facts, your desperation is showing. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #45
Who never owned a gun. Or hunted. Or bragged about it when pandering to gun nuts. Like Annie Oakley. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #44
We need a president who isn't a neocon on FP even more cali Feb 2016 #21
The supreme court doesnt decide foreign affairs. boston bean Feb 2016 #27
And the goddamn SCOTUS is not the only issue. cali Feb 2016 #46
I understand that it isnt the only issue. boston bean Feb 2016 #50
Agree 100%! MoonRiver Feb 2016 #30
We need a Democratic nominee who gives the financial industry and lobbyists no quarter! beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #36
I do actually. And I understand who was the reason for that case. boston bean Feb 2016 #39
Sure she would. Those millions she took from them won't affect her decisions at all. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #47
You want to point to an instance of quid pro quo? boston bean Feb 2016 #55
That doesn't usually happen until after they're elected. Are you new to politics? beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #57
So, its just this campaign we should ever discuss. boston bean Feb 2016 #60
Are you new to politics? Money buys influence. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #62
I want to know precisely what influence was bought. boston bean Feb 2016 #66
Re-read post #57 and figure out which part you got wrong, then get back to me. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #68
I understood it perfectly. You got nothing. No proof. boston bean Feb 2016 #69
Keep trying, you'll get it eventually. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #70
I'm barely making an effort. You have no proof of any quid pro quo. boston bean Feb 2016 #71
Wow, you are a novice. You probably believe lobbyists are voluteers. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #72
I'm someone who requires proof for allegations. boston bean Feb 2016 #74
You need proof that money buys influence? Google: lobbyists. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #76
I need proof that hillary provided quid pro quo to someone boston bean Feb 2016 #77
Well then you should go ask someone else because I never made that claim. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #78
I'm confident I made my point. boston bean Feb 2016 #79
Not really but if you want to think you did go for it. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #80
I have. boston bean Feb 2016 #81
Seriously, google lobbyists, it's quite eye opening. You'll see why we oppose money in politics. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #82
Seriously provide some prrof Hillary has given quid pro quo boston bean Feb 2016 #83
Let's see proof that I made that claim first. I thought I was quite clear in post #57. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #84
Believe post number 6 starts it off. boston bean Feb 2016 #85
What does that even mean? Post 6 is about an assault weapons ban. See post #24: beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #86
Excuse me. Post 36. boston bean Feb 2016 #87
And? beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #89
I thought you had no proof and we could only base your boston bean Feb 2016 #90
Bupkis because you don't like it? I'll take Elizabeth Warren at her word, thanks. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #91
Elizabeth Warren said Hillary gave quid pro quo to someone who gave a donation?? boston bean Feb 2016 #92
Read my post again and show me where I made that claim. beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #93
So your post meant nothing. Good. boston bean Feb 2016 #94
You're going to need a bigger shovel. Here: beam me up scottie Feb 2016 #95
You might need an excavator. LOL boston bean Feb 2016 #96
Those of us in Flyover Country disagree. Odin2005 Feb 2016 #58
+1. You are not alone. Some of us moved to the big city and can't stand the rhetoric here. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #88
Hell, I just moved to Fargo and... Odin2005 Feb 2016 #97
All of DU can and may agree with you but, I don't know if ALL of America will agree with you. Hiraeth Feb 2016 #63
Couldn't agree more, Annie Oakley would be a bad choice Fumesucker Feb 2016 #65
Hell, this pro-2A lefty Democrat doesn't give the NRA a dime, let alone a "quarter." Eleanors38 Feb 2016 #75
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»We need a democratic nomi...»Reply #24