Glockslinger
07-05-2004, 07:06 AM
Just got this from Neal Knox:
July 2 Neal Knox Report - Handgun Control Inc. has sent the "Million
Moms" an "action alert" stating that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
and Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) intend to offer their "assault weapon"
reenactment bill (S. 2109) as an amendment to S. 2062, a bill to make
class action suits more difficult.
The "class action fairness" bill is supported by most Republicans and the
Bush Administration, and strongly opposed by the American Trial Lawyers
Association and, therefore, most Democrats.
According to the Brady Bunch, which last week had a conference call with
Feinstein, Democrats are intending to plant "poison pill" amendments to
kill the class action bill. What Feinstein wants to do is convince her
fellow D's to "hold off on their amendments and only allow her AWB to be
attached (making it) conceivable that the entire bill would pass."
Fat chance. While the Dems may want the AWB, class action suits bring
their generous trial lawyer donors real money.
The Dems might seek to add an AWB to the bill as one of their "poison
pills," but that alone, or with several other bills they want, wouldn't
be nearly enough to cause them to swallow the rest of the class action
bill.
Theoretically, enough Senators from both parties opposed the ban
reenactment in March to kill the amendment with a filibuster, but
Republicans don't do well on filibusters.
While flailing around for a "vehicle" to which her bill might be
attached, Feinstein is reportedly looking at H.R. 218, which roared
through the House June 24 with 297 co-sponsors. Its Senate companion, S.
253, has 70 co-sponsors.
Both bills would exempt "qualified" current law enforcement officers from
state or local carrying laws, and retired officers who have met - at
their expense - agency firearms training requirements. Already on the
Senate calendar, the AWB might very well be offered as an
amendment. Though filibuster-proof, there's enough strong opposition to
anyone carrying, I suspect the Kennedy types will attempt to broaden the
ban and make it permanent.
NRA-ILA has been quiet about these goings-on, so they are probably
confident they can strip off any "assault weapon" ban in conference
committee.
Even anti-gun Democrats like Rep. Martin Frost (D-Texas) have made it
clear that they don't want a recorded vote on any version of the Clinton
Gun Ban. They haven't forgotten that in 1994 the ban Clinton talked them
into supporting gave Republicans control of the Senate for the first time
in 40 years.
July 2 Neal Knox Report - Handgun Control Inc. has sent the "Million
Moms" an "action alert" stating that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
and Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) intend to offer their "assault weapon"
reenactment bill (S. 2109) as an amendment to S. 2062, a bill to make
class action suits more difficult.
The "class action fairness" bill is supported by most Republicans and the
Bush Administration, and strongly opposed by the American Trial Lawyers
Association and, therefore, most Democrats.
According to the Brady Bunch, which last week had a conference call with
Feinstein, Democrats are intending to plant "poison pill" amendments to
kill the class action bill. What Feinstein wants to do is convince her
fellow D's to "hold off on their amendments and only allow her AWB to be
attached (making it) conceivable that the entire bill would pass."
Fat chance. While the Dems may want the AWB, class action suits bring
their generous trial lawyer donors real money.
The Dems might seek to add an AWB to the bill as one of their "poison
pills," but that alone, or with several other bills they want, wouldn't
be nearly enough to cause them to swallow the rest of the class action
bill.
Theoretically, enough Senators from both parties opposed the ban
reenactment in March to kill the amendment with a filibuster, but
Republicans don't do well on filibusters.
While flailing around for a "vehicle" to which her bill might be
attached, Feinstein is reportedly looking at H.R. 218, which roared
through the House June 24 with 297 co-sponsors. Its Senate companion, S.
253, has 70 co-sponsors.
Both bills would exempt "qualified" current law enforcement officers from
state or local carrying laws, and retired officers who have met - at
their expense - agency firearms training requirements. Already on the
Senate calendar, the AWB might very well be offered as an
amendment. Though filibuster-proof, there's enough strong opposition to
anyone carrying, I suspect the Kennedy types will attempt to broaden the
ban and make it permanent.
NRA-ILA has been quiet about these goings-on, so they are probably
confident they can strip off any "assault weapon" ban in conference
committee.
Even anti-gun Democrats like Rep. Martin Frost (D-Texas) have made it
clear that they don't want a recorded vote on any version of the Clinton
Gun Ban. They haven't forgotten that in 1994 the ban Clinton talked them
into supporting gave Republicans control of the Senate for the first time
in 40 years.