Senators who opposed background checks losing support

[tinydancer]

PPP is a Democrat pollster. During campaigns they only poll for the Democrats and progressive organizations.

'Nuff said.

 

[Katzndogz]

The backlog on gun orders has hit 2 million. That's not total, it's just the backlog.

 

[Meister]

Support For Gun Control Drops To 49 Percent, Will Media Cover? | NewsBusters

Of course you quote an Ultra-Conservative Hack site....cool

And you quote who?
Huff Post and a democrat polling service?

 

[whitehall]

Well duh, a push poll by an arm of the democrat party "finds" that republican senators are losing support? When is the radical left going to deal with real issues instead of relying on spin from their fantasy blogs?

 

[Mertex]

Senators Lose Support After Opposing Gun Background Checks, Poll Shows

It is beginning even before the commercials from Gifford's group. I hope they spent the checks from the NRA well.

So that explains why Dems Senator up for reelection voted against it

This post wins the thread, and has thusly been ignored by the liberal folk around here.

Based on your opinion?

 

[hortysir]

I would hope so, with the majority of Americans supporting it, they were fools to go with the minority who apparently have no interest in the welfare of the country.

Since you have not problem putting the 2nd Amendment up to a vote, how about we put abortion up for a vote?

You see the Constitution is there to protect the rights of the people from mob rule.

So why do you hate the Constitution so much?

I don't hate the Constitution. The 2nd Amendment doesn't guarantee anyone the right to be able to buy tanks, mortars, bazookas, drones, etc., or anything they want, so how does background checks go against the 2nd Amendment?

And what does abortion have to do with background checks?

And we're also not guaranteed the ability to worship which ever God we choose, and we're not guaranteed the ability to peacefully assemble, or to speak freely, or to be safe from illegal search and seizure.

got it

 

[hortysir]

Support For Gun Control Drops To 49 Percent, Will Media Cover? | NewsBusters

Of course you quote an Ultra-Conservative Hack site....cool

And you quote who?
Huff Post and a democrat polling service?

Must have missed the USA Today link within the source....



USA TODAY Poll: Public support for gun control ebbs

Or are they too conservative for consideration?

 

[NYcarbineer]

PPP is a Democrat pollster. During campaigns they only poll for the Democrats and progressive organizations.

'Nuff said.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Final 2012 Polls Public Policy Polling

 

[Meister]

Of course you quote an Ultra-Conservative Hack site....cool

And you quote who?
Huff Post and a democrat polling service?

Must have missed the USA Today link within the source....



USA TODAY Poll: Public support for gun control ebbs

Or are they too conservative for consideration?

I think you were talking to Jim? I just stated that he called you on your con site, yet his was from a liberal source....just showing the irony of his post.

 

[hortysir]

And you quote who?
Huff Post and a democrat polling service?

Must have missed the USA Today link within the source....



USA TODAY Poll: Public support for gun control ebbs

Or are they too conservative for consideration?

I think you were talking to Jim? I just stated that he called you on your con site, yet his was from a liberal source....just showing the irony of his post.

Yea....was just too lazy to link back and re-quote his ignorant ass

 

[Lakhota]

Kelly Ayotte Confronted Over Background Checks Vote By Erica Lafferty, Newtown Victim's Daughter

 

[Darkwind]

Support For Gun Control Drops To 49 Percent, Will Media Cover? | NewsBusters

support for gun control was never that high.

 

[Lakhota]

Support for "Gun Control" is one thing. Support for "Universal Background Checks" is another - which continues to have strong support across all groups.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Support for "Gun Control" is one thing. Support for "Universal Background Checks" is another - which continues to have strong support across all groups.

no not really

the "bill" didnt have a universal background check in it

 

[Lakhota]

Support for "Gun Control" is one thing. Support for "Universal Background Checks" is another - which continues to have strong support across all groups.

no not really

the "bill" didnt have a universal background check in it

I know. It got watered down and still didn't pass.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Support for "Gun Control" is one thing. Support for "Universal Background Checks" is another - which continues to have strong support across all groups.

no not really

the "bill" didnt have a universal background check in it

I know. It got watered down and still didn't pass.

first they wanted to pass an unwritten bill

another one of those you have to pass it to see what is in it bills

when that was a no go they threw one together

this is why it appeared watered down

but in reality you cant have universal back ground checks

with out registration and registration is a no go

 

[Lakhota]

no not really

the "bill" didnt have a universal background check in it

I know. It got watered down and still didn't pass.

first they wanted to pass an unwritten bill

another one of those you have to pass it to see what is in it bills

when that was a no go they threw one together

this is why it appeared watered down

but in reality you cant have universal back ground checks

with out registration and registration is a no go

Why would "registration" be required for universal background checks to work? BTW, I thought a federal registry of gun ownership was already against the law (up to 15 years in jail).

As for the registration argument -- licensed federal dealers could report the transaction to the state without giving the name of the buyers. The state could keep a database of transfers, including gun serial numbers and the identity of the seller, which would help police investigations. Or, as universal background-check advocates have proposed, gun owners themselves could be required to document transactions. If a gun was found in the possession of a criminal, police could go back to previous owners to provide the documentation. Under this system, most private sales would not be known to the government -- but police would have an avenue to investigate gun crimes and gun owners would have a strong incentive to do background checks and keep records regarding transfers, making it tougher for criminals to get guns.

More: Editorial: Universal background checks needed and don't have to lead to gun registration - Santa Cruz Sentinel

 

[JimH52]

This will cause the GOP to lose more ground in the Senate. They have lost the Senate the last two election cycles due to their slightly retarded Tea Bagger cousins. Now they will lose it because they are Puppets for the NRA. The Dem Senators who voted No will also be feeling the wrath of the voters. Count on it...

 

[Mertex]

Of course you quote an Ultra-Conservative Hack site....cool

And you quote who?
Huff Post and a democrat polling service?

Must have missed the USA Today link within the source....



USA TODAY Poll: Public support for gun control ebbs

Or are they too conservative for consideration?

What about public support for "background checks" - has it ebbed?

Posted: 04/29/2013 11:54 am EDT
Senators Lose Support After Opposing Gun Background Checks, Poll Shows

 

[Meister]

And you quote who?
Huff Post and a democrat polling service?

Must have missed the USA Today link within the source....



USA TODAY Poll: Public support for gun control ebbs

Or are they too conservative for consideration?

What about public support for "background checks" - has it ebbed?

Posted: 04/29/2013 11:54 am EDT
Senators Lose Support After Opposing Gun Background Checks, Poll Shows

Most people really didn't understand the wording of the Bill. "Background checks" is such a vague concept until the wording of the Bill is understood. "Mentally ill" was thrown out and "mental disorder" replaced. We've gone over this several times over the last month. Mental disorder is such a potentially overreaching term which the government would have had sweeping powers for taking guns out of the hands of Americans.
If they wanted the criminal background checks for gun shows (I think they are already there) it would have been a done deal. Anything more would have been too subjective to implement.
The media is mostly playing politics in their journalism of the subject. This is what the uninformed people read. If they did their homework, perhaps they would understand why it didn't pass. Even Baukus(D) from Montana who isn't running for another term voted "no" on the Bill.