• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Montana-(D) Baucus and (D) Tester voted FOR gun control!!

Faster horses

Well-known member
Ii hope these two get run out of town when/if they ever dare show
their face in this state again. :mad: :twisted:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was the most crucial Congressional vote on your right to keep and bear arms in twenty years.

Unfortunately, you’ve been betrayed!

The motion to proceed with Obama’s gun grab passed with the help of YOUR U.S. Senators, Max Baucus and Jon Tester.

That’s right -- Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester just VOTED FOR President Obama’s anti-gun agenda -- and AGAINST your Second Amendment rights.

Of the 41 pro-gun Senators we needed to hold together and stand with Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Lee (R-UT) and Ted Cruz (R-TX), we got 31.

Had just 10 more Senators voted "nay," we would have defeated this anti-gun legislation.

But Senators Baucus and Tester sold you out for an anti-gun “deal” crafted behind the scenes at anti-gun Senator Joe Manchin's black-tie-booze-a-thon on his yacht on the Potomac.

Please contact Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester and give them an earful!

You can reach Senator Baucus:

*** By Telephone: (202) 224-2651

*** By Email: Click here to send Sen. Baucus a message.

*** On Facebook:Give Sen. Baucus a piece of your mind!

You can reach Senator Tester:

*** By Telephone: (202) 224-2644

*** By Email: Click here to send Sen. Tester a message.

*** On Facebook:Give Sen. Tester a piece of your mind!

Let them know you won’t forget about their betrayal of you and your Constitutional rights.

The fight goes on. This was just one step in the legislative process. While it was a crucial step, it is not the last opportunity we will have to stop it.

In fact, debate on this bill will continue into next week.

Gun grabbers will likely now try to load this bill with as much anti-gun legislation as they think they can get away with.

We here at the National Association for Gun Rights will continue to work day and night to keep you up to date on all of Congress’ anti-gun schemes.



To do that I need your help.

Please contact Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester right away.

And, if you can, please consider chipping in $10 or $20 to help the National Association for Gun Rights keep up the fight.

Thank you.

For Freedom,


Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President

P.S. Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester betrayed you!

they voted FOR President Obama’s anti-gun agenda -- and AGAINST your Second Amendment rights earlier today.

Please contact Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester and give them an earful!

You can reach Senator Baucus:

*** By Telephone: (202) 224-2651

*** By Email: Click here to send Sen. Baucus a message.

*** On Facebook:Give Sen. Baucus a piece of your mind!

You can reach Senator Tester:

*** By Telephone: (202) 224-2644

*** By Email: Click here to send Sen. Tester a message.

*** On Facebook:Give Sen. Tester a piece of your mind!

Let them know you won’t forget about their betrayal of you and your Constitutional rights.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The National Association for Gun Rights is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens' organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the Constitutionally protected right-to-keep-and-bear-arms through an aggressive program designed to mobilize public opposition to anti-gun legislation. The National Association for Gun Rights' mailing address is P.O. Box 7002, Fredericksburg, VA 22404. They can be contacted toll-free at 1-877-405-4570. Its web address is www.NationalGunRights.org





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
States do background checks...correct?

What purpose do Federally enhanced background checks serve?

Will those that obtain their weapons illegally, now comply?

Up here in Canada, we are hearing on the news, that 90% of Americans agree with background checks. :lol:

what % of gun purchases are already purchased legally, with background checks.

Maybe they forgot the "Federal" part, in the news report. :roll:
 

Tam

Well-known member
I have no doubt Baucus and Tester will support anything the Dems put in front of them as that seems to be the way they go. As if they voice they will not be supporting the bill Obama will have them behind the dirty closed doors of the Oval Office and he will be BUYING BOTH OF THEM. BUT wasn't the vote to begin debating the topic of Gun Control where they can amend the proposed bill and try come to an agreement on the final bill that will be voted on later? As I understand the talks are expected to take a very long time as the two sides of the issue are so far apart. It is true several Republicans crossed the floor and voted with the Dems to start debating but that doesn't guarantee they will vote to support the bill only that they feel it is a discussion worth having and getting it over with so they can more on.

Mind you this is the time for all of you to contact your Congressman and make it know that if he or she votes to support any bill that infringes on the Second Amendment they will pay for it at the ballot box.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Actually all they voted for was to bring the issue up for discussion and a possible vote-- which I totally support... That's the reason several Repub Senators voted for it too...

This issue is too important to be filibustered and every person in Congress should have to cast a Yea or Nay vote... That's what they get paid for....

And in all the articles I've seen come out- both Baucus and Tester are against any major changes in the gun laws including registration... Just tightening up some of the loopholes and making peddling guns to criminals (straw buyers) a much more serious crime... I'm all for that....
 

Mike

Well-known member
When debate starts and the amendments start getting added on, it could be an entirely different Bill from which it started out.

When the ATF allows "Straw Purchasers" to buy guns & kill people without a way to track those guns, then turn around and make it crime, we must shake our heads.............

It's all a show by the Dems.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Mike said:
When debate starts and the amendments start getting added on, it could be an entirely different Bill from which it started out.

When the ATF allows "Straw Purchasers" to buy guns & kill people without a way to track those guns, then turn around and make it crime, we must shake our heads.............

It's all a show by the Dems.

Has he who complains about straw purchasers weighed in on Holder's fiasco?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
Mike said:
When debate starts and the amendments start getting added on, it could be an entirely different Bill from which it started out.

When the ATF allows "Straw Purchasers" to buy guns & kill people without a way to track those guns, then turn around and make it crime, we must shake our heads.............

It's all a show by the Dems.

Has he who complains about straw purchasers weighed in on Holder's fiasco?

Yea. With a "Bush Did It Too"!

Except it was much different under Bush.......... :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Whitewing said:
Mike said:
When debate starts and the amendments start getting added on, it could be an entirely different Bill from which it started out.

When the ATF allows "Straw Purchasers" to buy guns & kill people without a way to track those guns, then turn around and make it crime, we must shake our heads.............

It's all a show by the Dems.

Has he who complains about straw purchasers weighed in on Holder's fiasco?

It was a screwed up operation- BUT like I said before law enforcement has used sting operations for years-- and sometimes have to let the little guys walk in order to try and get Mr. Big... Its not something new... And sometimes these operations totally backfire and go awry....
But like I also said before- I have to give both the Bush and Obama administrations an ATTA BOY for at least trying... But when working with(or not being able to work with) Law enforcement as crooked as the Mexican police its a tough job to do to get Mr. Big when he is in a foreign country....
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Whitewing said:
Mike said:
When debate starts and the amendments start getting added on, it could be an entirely different Bill from which it started out.

When the ATF allows "Straw Purchasers" to buy guns & kill people without a way to track those guns, then turn around and make it crime, we must shake our heads.............

It's all a show by the Dems.

Has he who complains about straw purchasers weighed in on Holder's fiasco?

It was a screwed up operation- BUT like I said before law enforcement has used sting operations for years-- and sometimes have to let the little guys walk in order to try and get Mr. Big... Its not something new... And sometimes these operations totally backfire and go awry....
But like I also said before- I have to give both the Bush and Obama administrations an ATTA BOY for at least trying... But when working with(or not being able to work with) Law enforcement as crooked as the Mexican police its a tough job to do to get Mr. Big when he is in a foreign country....

Attempting to legitimize the "90% Myth" by walking guns surely was a screwed up operation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The amazing part was Holder DID NOT work with the Mexican authorities. They didn't even KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you really as stupid as you seem? :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
Whitewing said:
Has he who complains about straw purchasers weighed in on Holder's fiasco?

It was a screwed up operation- BUT like I said before law enforcement has used sting operations for years-- and sometimes have to let the little guys walk in order to try and get Mr. Big... Its not something new... And sometimes these operations totally backfire and go awry....
But like I also said before- I have to give both the Bush and Obama administrations an ATTA BOY for at least trying... But when working with(or not being able to work with) Law enforcement as crooked as the Mexican police its a tough job to do to get Mr. Big when he is in a foreign country....

Attempting to legitimize the "90% Myth" by walking guns surely was a screwed up operation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The amazing part was Holder DID NOT work with the Mexican authorities. They didn't even KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Are you really as stupid as you seem? :roll:

Who can you work with when the majority in the Mexican government are on the take? No way to tell an honest one from a crook.. That's what I said- it makes a hard job almost impossible...
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
It was a screwed up operation- BUT like I said before law enforcement has used sting operations for years-- and sometimes have to let the little guys walk in order to try and get Mr. Big... Its not something new... And sometimes these operations totally backfire and go awry....
But like I also said before- I have to give both the Bush and Obama administrations an ATTA BOY for at least trying... But when working with(or not being able to work with) Law enforcement as crooked as the Mexican police its a tough job to do to get Mr. Big when he is in a foreign country....

Attempting to legitimize the "90% Myth" by walking guns surely was a screwed up operation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The amazing part was Holder DID NOT work with the Mexican authorities. They didn't even KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Are you really as stupid as you seem? :roll:

Who can you work with when the majority in the Mexican government are on the take? No way to tell an honest one from a crook.. That's what I said- it makes a hard job almost impossible...

So............you're admitting it was a stupid & futile to walk guns just to make the "90%" lie seem legitimate in order to bring up the Gun Control debate again.

Now let's get back to the stupid question. :lol:
Who can you work with when the majority in the Mexican government are on the take

Exactly my point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :lol:

Why try it when you know it would fail? :lol:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Whitewing said:
Mike said:
When debate starts and the amendments start getting added on, it could be an entirely different Bill from which it started out.

When the ATF allows "Straw Purchasers" to buy guns & kill people without a way to track those guns, then turn around and make it crime, we must shake our heads.............

It's all a show by the Dems.

Has he who complains about straw purchasers weighed in on Holder's fiasco?

It was a screwed up operation- BUT like I said before law enforcement has used sting operations for years-- and sometimes have to let the little guys walk in order to try and get Mr. Big... Its not something new... And sometimes these operations totally backfire and go awry....
But like I also said before- I have to give both the Bush and Obama administrations an ATTA BOY for at least trying... But when working with(or not being able to work with) Law enforcement as crooked as the Mexican police its a tough job to do to get Mr. Big when he is in a foreign country....

So what you're saying is that you don't have a clue about the details of Fast & Furious?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
Oldtimer said:
Whitewing said:
Has he who complains about straw purchasers weighed in on Holder's fiasco?

It was a screwed up operation- BUT like I said before law enforcement has used sting operations for years-- and sometimes have to let the little guys walk in order to try and get Mr. Big... Its not something new... And sometimes these operations totally backfire and go awry....
But like I also said before- I have to give both the Bush and Obama administrations an ATTA BOY for at least trying... But when working with(or not being able to work with) Law enforcement as crooked as the Mexican police its a tough job to do to get Mr. Big when he is in a foreign country....

So what you're saying is that you don't have a clue about the details of Fast & Furious?

He equates "Fast & Furious" with his method of eating Breakfast, Lunch, & Dinner. :shock:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
OT thinks giving Bush an "atta boy" gives him cover to absolve Dear Leader of what can only be described as a major cluster fark that resulted in the deaths of many innocents on the other side of the border as well as two US LE officers.

It doesn't.

But then, is it really a surprise that Mr. "I'm really quite conservative" can't find the strength to call F & F for what it was; an ill-conceived, ill-prepared, poorly-executed operation that Dear Leader's administration, like so many of its other fark-ups, tried to blame on Bush?

No wonder he proudly wears his Obama knee pads.
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
States do background checks...correct?

while I am no expert.. and have only pruchaseed a few guns over the years.. everyone I bought needed a background check.. and most needed a permit through the local authorities and a waiting period..

I would say that most states use a combination of local checks and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)

hypocritexposer said:
What purpose do Federally enhanced background checks serve?

none really.. if a person fails it.. they can try again.. and hope it goes through .. or buy it from another source.. there is often no consequences to violating the law

hypocritexposer said:
Will those that obtain their weapons illegally, now comply?

why should they.. no one at the fed level really cares.. or enforces the law..

hypocritexposer said:
Up here in Canada, we are hearing on the news, that 90% of Americans agree with background checks. :lol:

which doesn't explain it well.. most Americans do support background checks.. including myself.. add in that most are ill informed as well and you get a spike in the polls ..

if they asked about passing a gun down.. or selling to a friend type transaction the numbers would fall off drastically.


if the gun show "loophole" or the so called internet or classified type sales were explained,.. then even more would change their minds on the issue..


hypocritexposer said:
what % of gun purchases are already purchased legally, with background checks.

they say that 40% of all guns are transferred without a background check.. but that is a wild guess at best..
"it was based on a survey of just a few hundred people in 1994,"
see: http://factcheck.org/2013/03/guns-acquired-without-background-checks/


at every gun show I have been at there have been a few private sellers..
and a few collectors selling.. most of those with the collectors and relics type ffl will require a background check at gun shows..

leaving a few (one or two) private sellers who have tables (paid to sell at the show) this could account for about 25 to 50 guns at a show with 1000 tables..

then there are the entrants who sell .. totally private one on one sales.. these very some shows and states do not allow this type of sale.. for those who do.. this can mean up to a dozen sellers and maybe 25 guns..

making it about 75 guns at shows that allow private sales.. and not all those are sold..

in all there is no way that makes up even 5 to 10% of the "gun show" sales..

add in that a large % of guns are purchased or transferred through those who have FFLs. it would only leave a small number of sales.. and in many of those cases the seller knows or is related to the buyer..
 

hopalong

Well-known member
smply put,,,old timer is clueless about the number of guns that are sold to straw buyers!!!!!He spouts his crap yet never offers anything except
He uses cut and pastes and changeing them to read like he wants,,,thwerefor he wont supply a link, just make some statement like google it, what a waste of oxygen he is
 

Tam

Well-known member
This was the nay votes on upholding the US Second Amendment and keeping the US out of the UN gun treaty
NAYs ---46
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Cowan (D-MA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

So does anyone believe a word in this article


Baucus opposes gun-control compromise bill
April 11, 2013 8:19 am • Associated Press

HELENA — U.S. Sen. Max Baucus said Thursday he opposes a gun-control bill backed by fellow Democrats and is still assessing a separate bipartisan compromise on background checks.

However, Baucus voted against blocking debate over the bill in the Senate, saying the issue is significant enough that debate and potential amendments should be allowed. The measure is supported by most other Democrats.

"I am not in favor of the bill as it is coming before the floor of the Senate and I will vote against it," Baucus told The Associated Press before senators voted down an attempt by conservatives to block the debate.

Baucus did not take a stance on a developing amendment by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Sen. Patrick Toomey of Pennsylvania that offers less restrictive federal background checks compared to the Democratic bill hitting the floor Thursday.

The developing amendment requires checks at gun shows and for online transactions but exempts noncommercial, personal transactions.

The bipartisan amendment also has language increasing firearms rights by easing some restrictions on transporting guns across state lines and letting gun dealers conduct business in states where they don't live.

As proposed, that amendment would replace stricter language in the Democratic bill on background checks. Baucus intends to await feedback from Montanans before he makes a final decision on that bipartisan change, his office said.

But Baucus made it clear he is opposed to the bill coming forward for debate in its original form, although he does like a portion of it that increases spending a little on school safety.

It is possible that amendments could get his support for an altered bill, he said, but indicated it was unlikely because Montanans have voiced strong opposition on key portions. He said his office has been flooded by about 16,000 phone calls against it, with only about 2,000 favoring it.

"My job is to stand up for Montanans, they are my employers," Baucus said.


Background checks now apply only to transactions handled by the country's 55,000 licensed gun dealers. Advocates of expanding the system say too many sales escape the checks that are supposed to keep weapons from going to criminals, the seriously mentally ill and others.

Baucus is up for re-election in 2014 and has faced criticism for his past support of Clinton-era gun control. Since then, he's worked hard to oppose gun control and become the only Senate Democrat with an A-plus rating from the National Rifle Association.

Baucus said Montanans have made it clear they oppose any ban on assault weapons, and he will again oppose any amendments to add such a provision to the gun control bill.

The six-term senator said he waited to announce his position on the bill so he could get more feedback from constituents. He said on a recent trip home he was told "don't vote for that Eastern gun bill back there."


Read more: http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/baucus-opposes-gun-control-compromise-bill/article_1ecf0f7a-4d82-517b-b041-2bc83f6fa9fd.html#ixzz2QVWirE5p

What a lying piece of crap, was he really thinking about Montanans when he voted to strike down the Second Amendment and support the UN gun treaty just last month? I DON'T THINK SO.
 
Top