Why exactly are Rand and Cruz supporting a replacement gun control bill?

[Brett85]

http://freebeacon.com/remove-and-replace/

"Cruz introduced two amendments Monday cracking down on straw purchases and gun trafficking. One of Cruz’s amendments would create a task force for prosecuting felons or fugitives who try to get guns illegally. The other amendment would prevent firearms straw purchasing and trafficking.

Cruz’s bills have attracted 10 cosponsors from the Senate’s conservative wing, including Sens. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), Rand Paul (R., Ky.), and Mike Lee (R., Utah)."

[Brett85]

It seems to me like the federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to be involved in this issue in the first place, due to the 10th amendment. Why should Rand, Cruz, and Lee support any federal gun regulations?

[sailingaway]

Huh.

I guess I'd have to read the bill before commenting. I am curious, though.

[Brett85]

Huh.

I guess I'd have to read the bill before commenting.

Yeah, me too. But it sounds strange that they would support any federal gun regulations if they're Constitutionalists.

[WhistlinDave]

Perhaps they figure some kind of gun control is going to end up passing sooner or later, so they might as well try to make it something that will actually deter and/or punish crime, in exchange for getting rid of provisions that will harm law abiding citizens' right and ability to buy and bear arms.

Kind of like saying, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, but pass something that makes a lot more sense than the ineffective stuff they were working on before. (Just my guess.)

[Brett85]

Perhaps they figure some kind of gun control is going to end up passing sooner or later, so they might as well try to make it something that will actually deter and/or punish crime, in exchange for getting rid of provisions that will harm law abiding citizens' right and ability to buy and bear arms.

Kind of like saying, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, but pass something that makes a lot more sense than the ineffective stuff they were working on before. (Just my guess.)

Perhaps it's an amendment that replaces an even worse portion of the bill, and they would ultimately end up voting against it anyway in the final vote. I hope that's the case.

[Origanalist]

Sens. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa), Ted Cruz (R., Texas), Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), John Thune (R., S.D.), Kelly Ayotte (R., N.H.), and John Hoeven (R., N.D.) are sponsoring the bill.

Lindsey Graham? I'm to the point where I think they are all out to screw us. Each and every one of them.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Perhaps they figure some kind of gun control is going to end up passing sooner or later, so they might as well try to make it something that will actually deter and/or punish crime, in exchange for getting rid of provisions that will harm law abiding citizens' right and ability to buy and bear arms.

Kind of like saying, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, but pass something that makes a lot more sense than the ineffective stuff they were working on before. (Just my guess.)
A compromise with evil is always in the favor of evil.

[Anti Federalist]

The other amendment would prevent firearms straw purchasing and trafficking.

That's already a felony to do either one.

[tsai3904]

That's already a felony to do either one.

I think I read somewhere that the amendment just stresses enforcement of existing laws. We'll find out tomorrow when the text is available.

[Brian4Liberty]

It seems it is broken down into multiple Amendments?


Cruz introduced two amendments Monday cracking down on straw purchases and gun trafficking. One of Cruz’s amendments would create a task force for prosecuting felons or fugitives who try to get guns illegally. The other amendment would prevent firearms straw purchasing and trafficking.

Cruz’s bills have attracted 10 cosponsors from the Senate’s conservative wing, including Sens. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), Rand Paul (R., Ky.), and Mike Lee (R., Utah).

It doesn't sound good though.

[The Goat]

Maybe they can sneak getting our full autos back. the gun nuts are dumb enough not to notice.

[Brian4Liberty]

More on this:


According to The Hill, Cruz’s proposals may be a part of a Republican plan to promote their priorities in gun control: stronger mental health record keeping and tighter enforcement rather than expansion of background checks.

Both of Cruz’s bills seem to line up with these objectives, however the text of the bills have yet to be made public. The first bill is co-sponsored by ten Republicans including fellow filibusterers Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Marco Rubio of Florida, and Mike Lee of Utah. The bill was introduced to, “protect law abiding citizens by preventing criminals from obtaining firearms.” The second bill, which has yet to garner any co-sponsors, would prevent gun trafficking and straw purchases.

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2013/04/cruz-introduces-legislation-to-tighten-enforcement-of-background-checks-not-expand-them/

[Brian4Liberty]

It looks like Rand and Mike only co-sponsored one specific amendment.


Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Monday introduced two gun bills, one of which is co-sponsored by a group of 10 Republicans, many of whom signed a pledge earlier this month to filibuster attempts to pass gun control.

The measures provide an alternative to the gun control bill the Senate will begin debate on this week, which would expand background checks on gun purchases, crack down on gun trafficking and beef up security in schools. GOP senators have vowed to block that bill, claiming it goes too far and infringes on the rights of gun owners.

Cruz introduced a bill to “protect law abiding citizens by preventing criminals from obtaining firearms.” Among the 10 GOP co-sponsors are Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.), Rand Paul (Ky.), and Mike Lee (Utah), all signers of the filibuster pledge. Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) is also a co-sponsor.

Cruz also introduced an alternative bill aimed at preventing the trafficking and straw purchasing of firearms that does not presently have any co-sponsors.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/294065-sen-cruz-introduces-competing-gun-bills

[tangent4ronpaul]

I wish Rand would follow the Swiss lead on this by funding groups like CPM and appleseed, ranges and underwriting ammo purchases for practice.

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/223123_10151160159529486_1493941371_n.jpg

http://www.odcmp.com/
http://www.appleseedinfo.org/

Ammo gets downright cheap when you buy a billion rounds at a pop!

-t

[speciallyblend]

I have 100% faith and belief that the us gov will destroy our country and already is!

[Noob]

The Vitter/Cornyn amendment would allow concealed carry holders and persons in constitutional carry states to carry nationwide.

The Burr amendment would guarantee that veterans cannot lose their gun rights without a court order.

the Barrasso amendment would defund state governments that release the names of gun owners.

[Aeroneous]

Perhaps it's an amendment that replaces an even worse portion of the bill, and they would ultimately end up voting against it anyway in the final vote. I hope that's the case.

That's what I was thinking. Thomas Massie and Justin Amash are planning something similar with CISPA.

[jbauer]

That's already a felony to do either one.

That's my thoughts. Straw purchases are already a felony. Maybe they're trying to get a no meat amendment onto the bill so they can atleast say they tried to stop felons from getting guns.

[The Gold Standard]

So this whole infiltration plan is working out great. Republicans are as bloodthirsty as ever before and calling for a domestic police state crackdown. Meanwhile, the trojan horse is jumping on board with gun control legislation. How exactly does this benefit a liberty movement? By showing the GOP sheep that there is no right to bear arms, only a privilege granted by the government that can be revoked at their whim?

[The Gold Standard]

The Burr amendment would guarantee that veterans cannot lose their gun rights without a court order.


So what it really says is that veterans can "legally" lose their God-given right to bear arms with a court order. Outstanding.

[Brett85]

The Vitter/Cornyn amendment would allow concealed carry holders and persons in constitutional carry states to carry nationwide.

I'm not sure if I support that either. Ron and Amash voted against a similar bill on the basis that it violated the 10th amendment. They said that it stretched the commerce clause.

[jmdrake]

One of Cruz’s amendments would create a task force for prosecuting felons or fugitives who try to get guns illegally.

Like we need another federal task force? Here's an idea. How about a federal task force to investigate the federal task force that sold illegal guns to Mexican drug lords?

[Brett85]

One of Cruz’s amendments would create a task force for prosecuting felons or fugitives who try to get guns illegally.

Like we need another federal task force? Here's an idea. How about a federal task force to investigate the federal task force that sold illegal guns to Mexican drug lords?

Yeah, I hope that Rand isn't in favor of that amendment.

[Pericles]

Usually, there are two strategies to amending legislation that you oppose:

1. Weaken the effects of the proposed legislation, so that it is less bad.
2. Add something that the supporters of the legislation will find so intolerable, that they will drop or be forced to vote against their own bill.

[Aeroneous]

I'm not sure if I support that either. Ron and Amash voted against a similar bill on the basis that it violated the 10th amendment. They said that it stretched the commerce clause.

I see the argument that it is violating the 10th Amendment, but at the same time any state that limits concealed/open carry in any fashion within their state is in violation of the 2nd Amendment. So it's a violation of the 10th Amendment which attempts to protect the 2nd Amendment... sorta.