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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Huh? jamese777 Jun 2016 #1
An amendment to include a due process requirement for 'no fly, no buy' lists... friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #2
Compromise is better than nothing metroins Jun 2016 #3
What? A compromise by 2A folks was rejected? Too much due process? Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #35
Too much due process? n/t meaculpa2011 Jun 2016 #66
Yep, the perfect the Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #4
its in the details. drray23 Jun 2016 #5
And now DoJ won't have any say whatsoever, beyond the already existing regulations friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #6
It was "nothing" either way... Chan790 Jun 2016 #7
For one thing, they wouldn't have looked like a bunch of hypocritical sheep... friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #8
Thank you. I agree. The Republican bill was actually counterproductive and just an skylucy Jun 2016 #10
So, the proposal was less effective than the old controller "24-hour cooling off period?" Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #36
So you admit it is all just politics. former9thward Jun 2016 #42
In this case, yes...on both sides. Chan790 Jun 2016 #44
The GOP can continue to vote against reform lancer78 Jun 2016 #52
Their problem is the "squishy" middle. Chan790 Jun 2016 #58
you might be right lancer78 Jun 2016 #70
And that would have been better than the nothing we got (nt) Recursion Jun 2016 #9
I don't agree - Justice Jun 2016 #46
If someone is on the no fly, no buy list, the file should be readily available aikoaiko Jun 2016 #12
No time, 3 days is like 3 minutes for the feds to gather docs and present it to a judge the uponit7771 Jun 2016 #18
Excuses former9thward Jun 2016 #40
"This would all be computerized like the current federal background check for buying firearms is." Chan790 Jun 2016 #45
Black lists create fear, awe, and doubt. All likely desired features HereSince1628 Jun 2016 #22
72 hours is plenty of time Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #15
72 hours is not enough time. Republicans have a habit of Exilednight Jun 2016 #16
Maybe you don't grasp what's going on here Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #17
you might not like the facts, bit that's reality. The reason the CBC Exilednight Jun 2016 #19
False. The CDC does collect and publish gun statistics. Kang Colby Jun 2016 #24
Either way, the CDC is toothless when it comes to guns. Exilednight Jun 2016 #25
If toothless means can't advocate for gun control.... Kang Colby Jun 2016 #33
Pretty toothless when it WAS advocating for gun control... Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #37
I would find that interesting Uponthegears Jun 2016 #57
Simple gun possession isn't a disease. Kang Colby Jun 2016 #61
Turn to page 23 of your link Uponthegears Jun 2016 #63
It doesn't say that. Kang Colby Jun 2016 #64
72 hours starts the second the person on the NF list attempts to purchase a firearm.... uponit7771 Jun 2016 #20
It's really 3 business days and they can easily have it done Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #23
Ah, ok... well... shit, I hate it when they make footballs out of these issues uponit7771 Jun 2016 #29
Restraining orders are issued on presumption of threat... Chan790 Jun 2016 #60
Is 72 hours enough time to show probable cause should not have gun? I don't think so. Justice Jun 2016 #47
Sure it is Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #55
I don't think either the Democrats or Republicans got it right. Chan790 Jun 2016 #59
This is what RKBA activists seem to miss. Chan790 Jun 2016 #56
So what is acceptable? lancer78 Jun 2016 #50
I believe this is the amendment in question RAFisher Jun 2016 #11
Basically, ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #13
Too many people read Kafka's The Trial and thought, wow, what a great legal system! NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #14
The burden is NOT like a bench warrant, more to prove than a LEOs word on the case uponit7771 Jun 2016 #21
They have three days to file an emergency petition. Straw Man Jun 2016 #34
Probable cause - not any evidence at all. Would they have met the burden with the Orlando shooter? Justice Jun 2016 #48
If they don't have probable cause ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #62
The idea that they have proof on file is demonstrably wrong. The bill was a fig leaf. Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #26
So you advocate denial of a Constitutional right without cause or proof? Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #31
I advocate that the 3 day limit means checks will never happen. This isn't about due process. Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #32
How about you get your information before you put the guy on a terror list Travis_0004 Jun 2016 #53
Three days is not enough. That is the point. it requires funding and this bill has none. Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #65
How many days would be acceptable? Travis_0004 Jun 2016 #69
The FBI needs 25 days on average to determine if a gun purchaser is illegal Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #71
I despise the idea of taking away protected rights without bighart Jun 2016 #27
I already own several Semi-auto firearms. oneshooter Jun 2016 #28
It would do no good for guns already owned bighart Jun 2016 #30
Of course due process - but not a fig leaf that is meaningless. Which 72 hrs to show probable cause Justice Jun 2016 #49
The proposal is still uncomfortably close to a 5A violation, but not the... Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #38
If Senate Dems accepted due process, it still would have been voted down. JustABozoOnThisBus Jun 2016 #39
So if nothing works then why bother with it at all? former9thward Jun 2016 #41
Because it feels good, like the temporary assault weapon ban. JustABozoOnThisBus Jun 2016 #43
Senator Manchin said this very thing would happen. Alluded to it as a set up by the GOP. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #51
SpinING it for the republicans liberal N proud Jun 2016 #54
it simply AMAZES me how these repub enablers continue to deny that the obvious Gabi Hayes Jun 2016 #68
The FBI needs 25 days on average to determine if a gun purchaser is illegal Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #67
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If Senate Democrats had a...»Reply #1