Rubio, Inhofe join group threatening to filibuster gun control bill

[dan_bgblue]

Linkage

[KeithKSR]

60 votes to stop this filibuster will be nearly impossible to come up with when the legislation doesn't have much support.

[suncat05]

Today one of Senator Rubio's office representatives for this area was in the Courthouse, and I had an opportunity to speak with him at length, about this and other topics of concern.
Senator Rubio's rep told me that he did not believe, from everything that he's heard, that this gun control measure will not need to be filibustered due to lack of support on both sides of the aisle. I believe him, but we'll see how it plays out. Don't forget, we have guys like Reid, Schumer, etc. on the other side. If their lips are moving they're lying.
We also talked about immigration reform, and the possible dangers that North Korea and China pose to the Pacific rim region. And although I am hurting financially like most other Americans, the economy did not come up. And I don't honestly know what else you can say about the economy right now other than it is crummy. Yeah, we've seen record stock market numbers in the last couple of weeks, and several large companies are reporting record profits, but this is also coming from the MSM, so my evaluation of that is this: if their lips are moving, they're lying. Their profits are not finding their way into my wallet.

[CitizenBBN]

Interesting suncat. Thanks for sharing that.

Slight aside but didn't want to start a new thread for it. Got a call today from Rsr group, one of the larger firearms wholesalers. I had some stuff on wishlist. He called to touch base, nice people in the gun business by and large, and told me things were a little quieter but part of that is they have nothing to sell. He said they carry 1,680 handgun models, and had zero in stock. No handguns period. Also no ammo, none. He was trying to scare up some 300 weatherby, said most of it may be a year before they get it in stock.

He said leo only dealers were calling them to try to find ammo, even state and locals couldn't get it.

I'm selling a couple thousand rounds in an auction this weekend, now I'm wondering if I shouldn't have stockpiled more. Small guys are being quoted 2015 delivery dates but a year for major wholesalers? I now have zero doubt the Feds are competing for the trickle of ammo out there now, leave everyone to their own conclusions as to why these huge multiple year orders are being placed in midst of the shortage.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

[suncat05]

I think, Citizen, that the Feds are buying the ammo up for 2 reasons: 1)to keep it away and out of the hands of normal American citizens, and 2)for use against normal American citizens when the time comes.
You may not agree with reason # 2, and while I'm not a conspiracy theorist either, I just have an uneasy feeling about WHY they're putting every round possible on lockdown from the normal American citizen.
And I do not believe for a second that they're buying it all for "training". Training rounds are FMJ, not hollowpoint rounds, as we discussed a few weeks ago. Something is amiss, we just don't know what exactly yet. JMHO.

[CitizenBBN]

We agree a lot more than we don't on this one. I don't have a full explanation either, but the numbers just don't add up for that being training ammo, not that amount per year and it's not clear why you go do a long term contract on it right now either. I get the volume discount thing, but there's a point at which the margin is all but nil and that's way before you get to a billion and a half rounds of ammo. A huge contract wouldn't shock me, but this is way more than just huge. This is enough to supply a major war, including training needs.


OK, just wasted 10 minutes on this:

DHS is buying 1.6 billion rounds over 4/5 years. I was curious how that compared to military consumption. Found a cite from 2011 that the US was starting to import ammo from Israel b/c we were running out, and the DoD reported they were using about 1.8 billion rounds a year including combat and training.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...-28580666.html

So they need 1/4th or 1/5th per year of what the entire US military is using in combat and training just for training? The US has a rough standing army of 1.5 million. DHS has cited it has more than 100,000 armed officers to supply. I know not all soldiers go to the range every week but current US combat deployment in Afghanistan alone is 68,000.

Basically DHS is saying it will use 3,200 rounds per officer a year in training minimum. I want to see proof they are training that much. Suncat maybe you can provide some insight on that number, but from what I know that's very high for training. Certainly compared to US military consumption it's pretty high. Im sure the US has more than 100,000 stateside that train with weapons plus about that overseas in various combat situations.

[suncat05]

Let's review a little; not long ago I spoke with 2 of my friends that work for I.C.E. & The U. S. Marshals Service. Both told me that when they train & qualify the standard is FMJ. Hollowpoint ammunition is for duty purposes. That has been the standard for years. Is there now a change in Federal training doctrine? Not that anyone I know is aware of or has been told about. And, besides that, both of them told me that their training time, most notably "range time" has been cut way back. To the point that the only shooting they're doing is 1 round of qualification, and they're using their previously issued duty rounds for that. 40 rounds per officer, and then new duty ammo is issued. And.......instead of going to the range 3 or 4 times annually, they're only going once annually.
So the amount of rounds used, type of rounds used, and number of times used in qualifications currently as opposed to the previous norm just do not jibe with the massive quantities of rounds that the Feds are ordering and apparently stockpiling.
The numbers don't add up to basic qualification by any previously known/accepted norm. Not even remotely. And especially given what now passes as the norm.
So where does this shake out, and how? It doesn't from this point of view.

[suncat05]

Let's do the math here: 40 rounds times 100,000 officers = 4 million rounds expended.
That's not even close to the number of rounds purchased, and not factoring in an officer not meeting minimum qualification standards with a 2nd round of shooting, or even among the worst shots on the line having to go a 3rd time before being relegated to desk duty until that officer does finally qualify.

The numbers don't add up. And it's not even close.

[KeithKSR]

I think, Citizen, that the Feds are buying the ammo up for 2 reasons: 1)to keep it away and out of the hands of normal American citizens, and 2)for use against normal American citizens when the time comes.
You may not agree with reason # 2, and while I'm not a conspiracy theorist either, I just have an uneasy feeling about WHY they're putting every round possible on lockdown from the normal American citizen.

I think you have nailed it.

[CitizenBBN]

I wonder if we could get either a Congressman to get it or do an open records request to see the budget analysis that shows they need this much ammo. If they really need this much there should be spreadsheets and emails and submissions from the various DHS sub agencies with their requests and spreadsheets and training summaries. There should be a normal paper trail of how they got to this number. Let's see it.

[dan_bgblue]

Now up to 14 to filibuster

[CitizenBBN]

Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey and West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin are reportedly in talks for a proposal to expand the checks to gun shows and Internet sales -- but, importantly, exempt some sales between hunters or close relatives.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2Pw1vSKOv

They're already in place for any internet sale, i.e. a sale that requires any shipping. If two people find each other and meet in public they don't apply, but to me that's not an "internet sale". Even if it is, again how do we enforce that versus "sales between hunters"? How they found out about each other is now something we have to track?


If Obama is so concerned about using Congressional procedure to force things on the American people the polls show they don't want, or prevent things they do want, will he now voluntarily repeal Obamacare, passed using a plethora of procedural tricks and backroom deals over the opposition of most Americans?

These aren't "tricks". They're designed into the system to prevent tyranny of the majority. What "most people want" isn't really relevant. At one time "most" people in this country were fine enslaving other people in this country. It's about the rights of individuals, not the will of the majority. OF course we know that is completely contrary to Obama's view of this country and the view of his supporters.

Personally I'd be fine with requiring 60 votes to pass anything in the Senate b/c I'd just as soon they pass almost no laws at all.

[KeithKSR]

Chuck, that legislation tells how little these jokers actually know about gun purchases.

Obama criticizing "political stunts" while flying Newtown families to DC to use them as human props is more than just a little hypocritical.

[Doc]

Chuck, that legislation tells how little these jokers actually know about gun purchases.

Obama criticizing "political stunts" while flying Newtown families to DC to use them as human props is more than just a little hypocritical.

Its only a political stunt when the other party does it.