It was a valiant uhh, full of crap effort

[P7M13]

From the article:

expanding what gender-affirming care must be covered by insurance plans and securing legal protections for providers who perform abortions for patients who come from states in which similar procedures would be illegal.

Some stuff, I fail to comprehend. States pass laws which allow people to sue gun manufacturers because their product works as intended, but give protection to personnel who knowingly terminate a life.
The hypocrisy makes my head hurt.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Keep the posts and comments to firearm related content...
Or the thread will be closed.
Andy

 

[raftman]

So is 348 scrapped and it's just this "ghost" gun/upper serialization crap going forward?

The injunction will hold as far as magazine capacity for now?

348 is probably dead for now (although there are certainly those who will not rest easy until the legislative session is actually over 6/25). Allegedly only the "ghost gun" regulation is what's moving forward and supposedly won't include needing to serialize uppers. The House will be voting on it 6/21. In theory, the House Republicans could walk out and kill the bill at no risk (there aren't 10 days left to miss in the legislative session, so they won't render themselves ineligible for reelection). But they probably won't. The magazine portion of 114 should remain unchanged till at least September.

 

[PiratePast40]

348 was already dead so there was zero loss by the Dems. The age restrictions of 2005 have already been ruled unconstitutional so that was another "no loss" by the Dems. The registration and serialization of uppers was a mistake and not actually one of their demands. It would have been impossible to enforce and would soon be changed.

I'm confused as to exactly what was gained by "compromise". Can someone help me out here? Senator Knopp, can you explain it in 8th grade English so we can understand?

 

[kmk1012]

348 was already dead so there was zero loss by the Dems. The age restrictions of 2005 have already been ruled unconstitutional so that was another "no loss" by the Dems. The registration and serialization of uppers was a mistake and not actually one of their demands. It would have been impossible to enforce and would soon be changed.

I'm confused as to exactly what was gained by "compromise". Can someone help me out here? Senator Knopp, can you explain it in 8th grade English so we can understand?

If you are having a tough time comprehending then how are we supposed to? You have been more involved than most! Not a dig at you but shows how all this multitude of information lately is very confusing. Keep
Up the good work @PiratePast40! We are lucky to have you on our team.

 

[PiratePast40]

That was sarcasm aimed at Knopp.

Probably should have phrased it a little better.

 

[PiratePast40]

I'll pass along something I sent to a few of the senators. This went to the few that I've personally met and have engaged in a dialogue:

Dear Senator,
I want you to know that your sacrifice and commitment to the greater good is appreciated.

Hoping that the below quote from Winston Churchill helps give you strength. This particular quote was from October of 1941, when the very existence of his country was in question. They were facing a terrifyingly powerful enemy and help from allies was painfully slow. They were disheartened and fearing the worst as they lost family, friends, and fellow countrymen in a war they were losing. Without the moral support of leaders, the people would have lost the will to continue standing up for their country.
.
"Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never give in, except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."
― Winston Churchill, Never Give In! The Best of Winston Churchill's Speeches

Respectfully,