"There Aren't Votes For That" - GOP Senators Reject Trump's Gun-Control Proposal

President Donald Trump shocked his Republican allies in Congress on Wednesday when he said during a televised meeting with a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the White House Cabinet Room that lawmakers must support raising the age limit and confiscating guns from people deemed mentally ill, along with a host of other gun-control measures that would be anathema to most Republicans.

During the meeting, Trump said he supports a Democratic proposal to use the Toomey-Manchin gun control proposal as a base bill and build on top of it. Meanwhile, lawmakers should consider a sweeping expansion of concealed-carry protections as part of a separate package. He also said an assault-weapons ban should be considered, to the visible delight of California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, according to the Hill.

During the meeting, Trump said "it doesn't make sense" that an 18-year-old can buy an assault rifle capable of killing dozens, but must wait until they're 21 to purchase a hand gun.

GOP

However, after the meeting, several lawmakers told reporters that they wouldn't support Trump's demands to "go big" on gun control.

Even Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who has recently expressed support for raising the age limit to 21, said he wouldn't support the Manchin-Toomey proposal, which would also help close the so-called "gun show loophole".

"I haven't voted for it in the past, I'm not inclined to vote for it now,” Rubio told reporters after the meeting. He also noted that the shooters in recent mass killings did not buy their weapons at gun shows or from unlicensed dealers and wouldn’t have been stopped if Toomey-Manchin had been law.

Rubio said “we’re better off” prosecuting straw purchasers who attempt to evade gun laws already on the books or tightening the current background-check system with the Fix NICS bill.

However, some Republicans questioned Trump's sincerity and expressed doubts that Trump fully understands the Toomey-Manchin proposal. They predicted he would change his mind on comprehensive background checks.

While Trump argued in favor of a more expansive gun-control bill, Senate Republican Whip John Cornyn, who is leading the GOP response to gun violence in the upper chamber, told reporters after the meeting that he still favors "a limited approach."

Cornyn wants to advance a bill that he co-authored with Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy and introduced late last year after the Las Vegas shooting, the deadliest mass shooting in US history. It would give state and local officials more incentive to report relevant information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System known as NICS. Reporting failures have played a role in several recent mass shootings, including a shooting at a Texas church late last year that left more than two dozen people dead.

"For me the most obvious place to start is the Fix NICS [National Instant Criminal Background Check System] bill that has 46 cosponsors," Cornyn said of the bill he’s co-sponsored with Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy (Conn.).

When it comes to raising the age limit on assault-rifle purchases, GOP senators said the bill would never garner enough votes to pass both the Senate and the House. Some senators even walked back their support of the age-limit increase.

GOP leaders at lunchtime Wednesday said that raising the age threshold wouldn’t have enough votes to pass.

"There aren’t the votes there for that," Senate Republican Conference Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) told The Hill.

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), who over the weekend indicated support for raising the age for buying rifles, on Tuesday walked back his earlier statement.

...

But Cornyn poured cold water on the idea of moving a comprehensive bill, cautioning it’s “easier said than done.”

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), another member of the GOP leadership, said, “if you actually tried to put a comprehensive bill together and take a bill to the floor that was comprehensive, you’d probably wind up with no result.”

He said the Fix NICS bill “has the biggest chance to get 60 votes.”

Meanwhile, Pat Toomey argued that Trump’s words had given the bill he wrote with West Virginia's Joe Manchin III new life.

"It does feel as though the atmosphere has changed. It does feel to me as though there are members who were not willing to do something in the past that might be willing now," he said. "I know for a fact that there are individual senators who have voted against Manchin-Toomey who have told me they are reconsidering."

But even some Democrats - who welcomed Trump's declaration of support for a more comprehensive bill - were skeptical that such a bill could pass.

But even Democrats were skeptical that Trump would follow up his bold talk on Wednesday with action.

Murphy, a champion of universal background checks, said he is “not highly confident.”

"The White House can now launch a lobbying campaign to get universal background checks passed as the president promised in this meeting or they can sit and do nothing. We’ll see," he said.

Yesterday, Dick's Sporting Goods and Wal-Mart Stores  said they would act independently to curb assault-rifle sales, with Dick's saying it would permanently ban sales of AR-15s and similar military-style rifles (they said something similar after the Newtown masacre, but quietly reintroduced the guns once the public scrutiny had subsided). And Wal-Mart said it would only sell assault rifles to adults who are at least 21 years of age.

Comments

Looney Thu, 03/01/2018 - 09:21 Permalink

 

Here’s my old post from August:

Fuck that shit! He has flip-flopped on almost EVERYTHING. His retarded predecessors, at least, pretended to keep some promises made to their respective bases.

Trump casually declares that his views have evolved and… THAT’S IT!!!

Mark my words, after the next school shooting (God forbid!) and a few Ivanka’s tears, his views on the 2nd Amendment will “evolve”, too.

I will never vote for a Libtard, but I will not vote for this cunt again either, even if that helps a Libtard to become POTUS.

Fuck him, fuck his bankers and fuck his generals!

Fuck his always-crying Ivanka and dickless Jared, and fuck his cocksucking sons, too!

Now, back to the regularly scheduled “I don’t give a fuck” show.  ;-)

Looney

J S Bach Looney Thu, 03/01/2018 - 09:25 Permalink

Wow, Loon... tell us what you really think.

But, I tend to agree.  There are some issues one doesn't "compromise" on.  The Second amendment is one of them.  It is the last remaining bastion of white "power" left in our disintegrating Republic.  I'm sure the NRA will see its membership numbers swell as a result of all this... and correspondingly, Trump's support numbers will fall.  He deems himself a "master of the deal".  Yeah, well Agent Orange, you're not going to "deal" our second amendment rights away without a contentious fight from your erstwhile devotees.

And speaking of amendments... where have you been regarding the attacks on our First amendment?  All major internet platforms (Google, FaceBook, Twitter, YouTube, Amazon, etc...) have been outright censoring right-wing content.  Even the usual lickspittle, Alex Jones, is about to go down the memory hole of Internet accessibility. Sites such as ZH may be next in (((their))) crosshairs.

From the White House... * crickets *

In reply to by Looney

JimmyJones J S Bach Thu, 03/01/2018 - 09:33 Permalink

I wonder where McCain stands on this one?  

Trump pulled off a nice move here, he can say "I tried" the Dems can't blame him and the Republicans who are safe in their States and Districts can say we blocked it will take the non-existent heat from the Dems.  Not to mention gun sales skyrocketed (a good thing in my opinion) and the NRA membership increased.  Sadly, because the shooting didn't accomplish what the Left wants, there will be another one.  Watch.

In reply to by J S Bach

lookslikecraptome Meat Hammer Thu, 03/01/2018 - 10:24 Permalink

"........ lawmakers should consider a sweeping expansion of concealed-carry protections as part of a separate package. He also said an assault-weapons ban should be considered"   U people get warped over nothing. Trump supports expanding CC. UH!!!!!!!!!!! What is wrong with that??????????  Well us normies should not have military assault weapons. I would much rather cc my pistol than walk down the street with an AR. The issues with this are the semantics of "assault weapon". If someone breaks into my home they will get wasted by sawed off shotguns, or 18 in barrel, 12 gauges. Bump stock???? That is a toy for range shooters that increases round out put by one round per second. 2 rounds per second regular semi auto, 3 rounds per second bump stock. Who cares??? Ban it.

CC is a good negotiation. More CC, less bump stocks = big win for america. Gun control does not work anyway and they will never outlaw the AR. Trump said "considered" on the assault weapons ban. Go with the flow. 

In reply to by Meat Hammer

sleigher Meat Hammer Thu, 03/01/2018 - 09:56 Permalink

"He just outed himself as a swamp creature. There is no backpedaling from a statement like grab the guns first, then we’ll deal with due process."

 

The context is important.  He said that in relation to an online threat from someone.  Take their gun first if they are making threats then due process.  Now it is still bad as in violate someones rights before due process is allowed but not as bad as it sounds as it pertains to taking guns away.  

 

Not defending him.  If he touches 2A in any way at all he will lose most of his base.  He knows that too.  I tend to think he is just posturing and nothing will actually happen.  Or as was suggested, this is him preparing for some truth to come out and "nope F you guys, veto everything."

In reply to by Meat Hammer

lookslikecraptome sleigher Thu, 03/01/2018 - 10:27 Permalink

One must read discretely in the lines, and between them. Here the written lines are there, Y get flipped. 

"........ lawmakers should consider a sweeping expansion of concealed-carry protections as part of a separate package. He also said an assault-weapons ban should be considered"   U people get warped over nothing. Trump supports expanding CC. UH!!!!!!!!!!! What is wrong with that??????????  Well us normies should not have military assault weapons. I would much rather cc my pistol than walk down the street with an AR. The issues with this are the semantics of "assault weapon". If someone breaks into my home they will get wasted by sawed off shotguns, or 18 in barrel, 12 gauges. Bump stock???? That is a toy for range shooters that increases round out put by one round per second. 2 rounds per second regular semi auto, 3 rounds per second bump stock. Who cares??? Ban it.

CC is a good negotiation. More CC, less bump stocks = big win for america. Gun control does not work anyway and they will never outlaw the AR. Trump said "considered" on the assault weapons ban. Go with the flow. 

In reply to by sleigher

Killtruck J S Bach Thu, 03/01/2018 - 09:35 Permalink

I personally don't have a problem with mentally ill people getting their guns taken away, as long as I am the one who gets to determine mental illness. Outside of that, go fuck yourself. 

What's that, you say? I can't possibly be the sole arbiter between mental illness and gun rights? Please see above. 

 

Still no mention of this kid's "mood-altering medications"...
 

In reply to by J S Bach

L Cornelius Sulla ejmoosa Thu, 03/01/2018 - 10:28 Permalink

This is precisely the point.  Psychiatry, as distinct from an objective medical discipline such as cardiology, determines what is or is not a mental illness by a political process within the American Psychiatric Association ("APA").  For example, gender identity disorder went from an illness to be treated to a protected status to be celebrated because of successful lobbying efforts of an extremist minority.  Given that the membership of the APA is already extraordinarily Leftist, it will not take any effort whatsoever for it to promulgate a "consensus" opinion that the desire to own firearms is a feature of a mental disorder.  The APA's new diagnostic criterion, thus, will provide the pretext for the unlimited confiscation of firearms.  Indeed, the more strongly one advocates gun ownership or the greater the number of firearms possessed, the sicker they are and the greater the need to divest them of any firearms.  Disarmament cheerleaders in the media and academia will present nothing but glowing reports of the benefit to public safety.     

In reply to by ejmoosa

Meat Hammer Looney Thu, 03/01/2018 - 09:36 Permalink

Looney, the last time I voted was in 2012. Our vote matters for shit. Many ZHers have made the government practically irrelevant in their lives, and I think it is the best strategy.

Increase your freedom arsenal (and concealed carry without permission from the enemy); have cash-producing tangible investments; stack precious metals; learn how to hunt, fish, grow and can your own food; throw away your tv; enjoy life.

In reply to by Looney

whosyerdaddy Looney Thu, 03/01/2018 - 09:42 Permalink

"even if it helps a Libtard become POTUS", a bridge too far for me. He may be New York screwing wit' people, he may be trying to advance the ball. It's all probably for show anyhow. I voted for Trump and am happy with the choice because the Hillopotamus was so bad and even worse the Establishment thought they could ram her down our throats.

In reply to by Looney

nmewn Looney Thu, 03/01/2018 - 10:13 Permalink

Looney,

Trump knew the Senate wouldn't go for it when he said it. I laughed all the way through the 700+ comment section on yesterday's post on this crap.

It's called "triangulation" ;-)

In reply to by Looney