So, they are done for the night. After several hours of nothing, they took a break for several hours. They come back and some guy droned on about considering amendments. Some words thrown out:

DC gun ban amendment

Sniper amendment

Assault weapons amendment

Concealed carry amendment

Gun show amendment

Cop killer bullets

Kennedy amendment

They will resume debate tomorrow and try to vote on Tuesday (hoping maybe Edwards and Kerry show up?).

The saying is true (paraphrased): Law is like sausages. If you like either, you should never watch them being made.

Update: Publicola has more. It appears some sort of deal has been made and it’s not looking good. Call your senators. This would seem, on the surface, to support some of the allegations that the NRA is willing to sell gun owners out for this immunity bill. It does fit their MO to cater to industry first and gun owners second.

Peggy is rightly upset about Bush’s stance on gay marriage. In fact, one of my favorite quotes from her site:

George Bush, I will not be your post-modern nigger.

Good for Peggy. Oddly, Kerry gets a pass from Peggy. On her main page, I counted three instances of the word Kerry (nothing dealt with him having the same position on homosexual marriage as Bush: marriage is between man and woman) and sixteen instances of Bush.

Odd how Kerry seems forgiven by gay groups in general.

Some people are still unconvinced that the NRA hasn’t sold out gun owners. I remain skeptical. I hope Clayton Cramer is right but, as I’ve been told, the NRA could have stopped the first Assault Weapons ban but didn’t.

Oh and for the record, I’m not too scared about the Senate as I’m fairly sure the AWB won’t pass the House.

Larry Craig R-Idaho for referring to the Assault Weapons Ban as a political placebo. He then compared gun shows to car shows. Sweet.

And he said: What happens when we no longer produce high-quality firearms in this country for our military and our police? Do we rely on China?

The SayUncle kick in the nuts goes to the opposition for using the following rhetorical references:

Good for the economy because emergency room jobs would increase.

Saturday Night Specials.

Racists use these guns

Carnage in the streets

Cop killer

And the whole host of other anti-gun rhetoric.

Update: Hatch threatens to add a repeal of DC’s gun ban to the bill. Nice.

Another Update: At this point, it looks like they may vote and there is talk about adding four amendments. No one knows what those are but I hope one is Hatch’s DC bill.

More: They pointed out neither Edwards nor Kerry was present. Shocking.

This would say:

Kucinich, Sharpton to stay in race to end. Nobody expected to really care.

Over at the High Road thread on the gun immunity bill (which the bill isn’t but I call it that to save typing, for future reference):

Don’t forget, when unloading a firearm, especially a Saturday night special, be sure to point it at the kid you are babysitting.

I just noticed that Jeff’s banner graphic across the top of his page looks like boobs. And I thought he was gay.

The AP:

A Republican-led bill to shield gun manufacturers and distributors from lawsuits arising from gun crimes passed its first Senate test Wednesday, but Democrats plan to complicate its future by forcing votes on extending an assault weapons ban and requiring background checks on purchasers at gun shows.

The Senate, with a 75-22 test vote, showed that there is enough support from both parties to get gunmaker immunity legislation through, but Democrats plan to try and add their gun legislation to the package before it heads to the House.

Democrats want “provisions that will close the gun show loophole, that would reauthorize the ban on assault weapons,” said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I. “We should require effective safety locks on handguns. We should improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check system.”

Those measures are less popular with the Senate’s GOP majority and could cause problems for the bill if included. The GOP-controlled House already has said it does not plan to approve an extension of the assault weapons ban.

“Some of our colleagues already announced they intend to play politics with this bill,” said Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, one of the legislation’s main sponsors.

The White House — which supports the gunmaker immunity bill, extending the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole — nonetheless called on the Senate to pass the legislation without amendments.

“The administration urges the Senate to pass a clean bill, in order to ensure enactment of the legislation this year,” the White House said in a statement. “Any amendment that would delay enactment of the bill beyond this year is unacceptable.”

Republicans, along with some Senate Democrats, have been pushing for the gun immunity legislation for some time. Gun advocates say firearm makers shouldn’t be forced to spend millions of dollars fighting off lawsuits designed to win large rewards and bankrupt them for making legal products.

Democrats including Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota agreed to back the legislation after gun supporters accepted a specification that firearms manufacturers and distributors would not be immune to lawsuits involving defective products or illegal sales.

But getting the 1994 assault weapons prohibition renewed also is Democratic priority this year. They picked up support Tuesday from GOP Sens. John Warner of Virginia, Mike DeWine of Ohio and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island.

Not out of the woods yet but it’s close.

The senate just called for cloture on the bill limiting frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers. The High Road is providing up to the minute coverage, if you’re interested. CSPAN’s site sucks. The video won’t play.

Update: Looks like cloture is the order of the day. Depending on your reading of the cloture rule, no amendments can be added or they can but have to do so quickly with the blessing of Frist. I don’t trust Frist so I hope the former is true.

Boortz is quoting Spoons.

“Orrin Hatch is less likely to bark at a Democrat than to wet himself at the sight of one.”

Bjorn has a sample of some NPR goings on.

So, there’s this guy. Apparently, he’s a politician in San Francisco (maybe you’ve heard of him). Anyway, he’s supporting gay marriage in San Francisco. That is so courageous. I mean, those homosexuals are so unpopular in that city. Glad to see him take a moral stand that may cost him votes. Meanwhile, he’s saying Bush tried to divide this country in order to advance his political career by messing with the Constitution.

Well, if you take the last six words out of that sentence, that’s exactly what you’re doing. Irony is lost on its perpetrators.

I guess it’s a good sign for the Assault Weapons Ban that you see the desperation of the anti-gun crowd. Some lies for today:

You never took them off the streets, you idiot.

By the way, an unlicensed seller is a citizen engaging in lawful commerce. I have sold and traded guns in the past. So, I suppose they want to license everyone? According the Fed’s own data, guns used in crime are rarely obtained from gun shows.

GOA rips the WaPo a new one:

Perhaps the Post might want to exempt rifles from its one-in-20 criteria when it hears that the one officer dying from a rifle wound was actually shot in 1977 and died 23 years later and 10 years after retiring with 20 years on the force. If we remove that one death from the list, then no officers died from rifle wounds received in the 16 year period cited.

That’s right, Maryland officers have not been shot and killed with AK-47s, AR-15s, M-1As… or any rifle whatsoever during 16 years examined (and this is the record in one of the most violent states in the union). Perhaps the Post should re-think its support for banning “assault-style” firearms.

The Geek links to Neal Knox:

The White House issued a “Statement of Administration Policy” calling for an unamended industry liability protection bill — on which VOTES ARE SCHEDULED BEGINNING AT 10:30 A.M. WEDNESDAY.

About 7 p.m. this evening Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist scheduled a vote at 10:30 a.m. on S. 1805, the renumbered S. 659/H.R.1036. First item up will be a filibuster-ending cloture vote on a motion to proceed.

ONE MORE TIME: Please call your Senators’ D.C. and state offices!

The White House “SAP” is important because it tells Republican Senators “President Bush doesn’t want to see the ‘assault weapon’ reenactment on his desk.”

George Bush may well have just said No! to the AWB. Given the fact he hasn’t met a bill he won’t sign, I am optimistic but not sold.

With that, I can get some sleep.

A group is criticizing Gibson’s The Passion because Jesus is portrayed by a white man. The group (The New Black Panther Party, which can only lead to its credibility) states that Jesus was black.

Well, that whole thing occurred somewhere around northern Africa/the middle east if I recall. I’d say Jesus was more olive skinned. And I saw this thing on Discovery Channel once that tried to piece together what Jesus would have looked like. They concluded he’d be olive skinned, have a large-nose, low brow and have short, dark curly hair.

I do tend to doubt that he looked like Chris Cornell.

Update: It occurs to me that I should now time it to see how long before this post offends someone and I get hate mail or nastygrams: You hear that, Ethyl? He thinks Jesus was an A-rab.

The Assault Weapons Ban has picked up three GOP supporters.

Getting the 1994 assault weapons prohibition renewed has been a Democratic priority this year. They picked up support Tuesday from GOP Sens. John Warner of Virginia, Mike DeWine of Ohio and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island.

“Although I voted against the ban a decade ago, over the past 10 years it has reduced crime dramatically and has made our streets safer,” Warner said. “The legislation also has protected the rights of gun owners better than many of us predicted.”

No, it hasn’t and no it hasn’t.

Update: Cool quote: From the 1999 Justice Department report on the effectiveness of the ban: “Given the limited use of the banned guns and magazines in gun crimes, even the maximum theoretically achievable preventive effect of the ban on outcomes such as the gun murder rate is almost certainly too small to detect statistically…”

I linked to Neal Knox who stated that people who thought the NRA would sell gun owners out were hysterical. I hoped it was good news.

Publicola says that the NRA probably plans to do just that, sell us out.

If the lawful commerce protection bill (which has now been renumbered and modified though pretty much the same) winds up getting the Assault Weapons Ban and the gun show bill (which would make otherwise lawful commerce illegal) attached to it, it needs to be killed.

If a modified bill passes the Senate, I will be angry. If the modified bill also passes the house, I will need 2,000 armed men be absolutely livid.

Update: It seems the NRA is emailing members (not me) and telling them to call their senators. They are to urge their senators to not allow the poison pill amendments to be attached. Good for the NRA. But if they kowtow after poison pills are added, I’ll be disappointed.

I make this pledge: If the Assault Weapons Ban sunsets this year and the NRA actively pursues the sunset without kowtowing to the immunity bill, I’ll join the NRA for life.

Looks like law enforcement officers can be held personally responsible when they mess up and violate someone’s constitutional rights:

A divided Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a federal agent can be sued for violating the constitutional rights of a couple during a search of their ranch, refusing to shield officers from personal liability when they make mistakes on search warrants.

The court, on a 5-4 vote, said that a mistake in the paperwork for a 1997 search in rural Montana was serious enough to allow a lawsuit against the officer who led a team of people on a fruitless hunt for illegal automatic weapons.

Officers are ordinarily immune from lawsuits over their conduct on duty, but the high court has made exceptions when they violate someone’s constitutional rights.

“It is incumbent on the officer executing a search warrant to ensure the search is lawfully authorized and lawfully conducted,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in the decision. “Even a cursory reading of the warrant in this case – perhaps just a simple glance – would have revealed a glaring deficiency that any reasonable police officer would have known was constitutionally fatal.”

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Agent Jeff Groh went to the ranch of Joseph and Julia Ramirez armed with a search warrant that did not list any items officers were searching for, Stevens said.

The four justices in dissent said he should have been forgiven the clerical mistake.

I’m sorry, but we can’t excuse clerical errors when it comes to someone’s civil liberties. Otherwise, every violation would suddenly involve a clerical error.

By grandfather used to make this all the time. Essentially, it is a soup. You make this when every thing in your fridge Must Go. It’s the end of the week and you leftovers are about to go bad, what do you do? Make Mustgo, of course.

Ingredients:

Beef stock (or beef bullion; or any sort of meat drippings)

Any meats and veggies in the fridge that you don’t want in there tomorrow. This includes cabbage, carrots, potatoes mashed potatoes, corn, beans, chicken, beef, pork, turkey, whatever. Use your own judgment. If it’s good in soup, it can go in the pot.

Bring beef stock to boil, add remaining ingredients. Let simmer until ingredients cook. Add water if necessary. Cook for at least an hour, preferably more. Eat with corn bread. It really is delicious and it’s different every time.

Neal Knox:

We’ve also been seeing an increase in hysterical speculation on the
internet – stated as fact – that NRA and “the Republicans” have cut a
deal to sell out gunowners.

It ain’t so.

I worried out loud back in 2002 that there would be efforts to combine
NRA’s “No. 1 Priority” – S. 659 – with the Clinton gun ban reenactment. In January 2003 I buttonholed some people who would know. As I reported at the time, they flatly denied any deal had been made, or would be made “because as important as 659 is, it’s not worth a gun ban.”

In April, at the annual meetings at Orlando, all the NRA brass, from President Kayne Robinson and Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre on down, at every opportunity, put equal emphasis on passing S. 659 and preventing reenactment of the ban. (I was delighted to see they were even using my description, “reenactment” – which is what a new law would be.)

Last September, again as I reported, I obtained a memo from turncoat
Robert Ricker to his anti-gun handlers excitedly describing the enthusiasm of a “moderate” Republican Senator’s staffer for combining S. 659 with an “assault weapon”; reenactment.

The Senator himself said “No deal.”

This week, after the hysterical reports of a sellout started bouncing around the internet, I had a chat with someone in NRA who knows: “We seek to pass S. 659 as a clean bill and will not accept a Clinton gun ban extension – for ten years or ten minutes — or the McCain-Reed ‘gun show loophole’ as the price for its passage.”

I am confident that there is no deal, and won’t be one – not from NRA at least.

I wonder who they could be talking about? Regardless, if this is true, it is excellent news.

Via Gunner comes this story:

A farmer who left two dead cows by the side of the road for rubbish collection got a nasty surprise from local police.

Authorities in Rutherford county deemed the dead livestock as “unattended vehicles” and issued them with the tickets.

The justification for this: The local sheriff’s department said they thought the cows were asleep.

Live cows are vehicles? Dead ones must be litter.

Kevin has a post on the lengths anti-gun folks will go to to scare us. Lies and more lies.

On John Kerry:

On the campaign trail, he claims he is for fiscal responsibility, but voted for the 1993 tax increase, the largest in history. He also voted against a balanced budget amendment at least five times. In April 2002 on CNN’s “Crossfire” he said that if the most recent tax cut aided economic growth he would see no reason to repeal it.

But despite the fact that the economy has grown — faster rates than in almost 10 years — he flip-flopped to pander to Democratic primary voters. Now he wants to repeal the exact same tax cut.

His website claims that he will fight for “affordable healthcare for every American.” This is a noble calling, considering he has reneged on his responsibility to the American people to make his obligatory votes as a U.S. senator. As of late November, he had missed nearly 300 votes, with at least 21 pertaining to healthcare.

I just spoke with the people who answer the phones for Bill Frist and Lamar Alexander. They stated that they were unaware that the Assault Weapons Ban would be attached to the frivolous lawsuit bill. That means not enough of you are calling.

To contact your Senators, go here.

If you’re in Tennessee, go here.

Kathy reports Bush is backing the FMA:

Why is it that our ‘states rights’ party becomes vehemently anti-states-rights when a state does something they don’t like?

Good question.

This is number 400 in the guns category. Today’s topic is the Assault Weapons Ban, the gun immunity bill and any thing else I find interesting.

Robert Douglas says it’s time to get off our collective asses.

The Geek is all over it. Just go here and scroll down until you can’t take it any more.

Manish is gun blogging here and here.

Jeff is on it too.

Insty predicted some Bush silliness back in 2001.

Les has his gun links up.

Some how a right to arms discussion turned into a discussion about porn taxes. Don’t ask, just read.

Clayton Cramer concedes the house is the way to go. I say yell at your senators too.

Kim du Toit is pissed. Nothing new, he always seems to be pissed.

Guy Montag, not this Guy Montag but the other one, goes to the range.

Kevin points out a crazy person.

Eric, a gay gun nut, has some insight with respect to the comparison of the right to arms to the right to marry whoever you choose. Quote of the day:

To those possessed of the regulatory mindset, though, they are an argument for repressive laws. The argument that “homosexuality kills” is about as logical and persuasive as the argument that “guns kill.”

The geek says it looks as though the battle for the Assault Weapons ban may start tomorrow:

S.659, the bill that will help eliminate frivolous lawsuits against the firearms industry, will be taken up in the Senate this week, possibly as soon as tomorrow. It is widely reported that Sen. Feinstein will attempt to amend the bill with a renewal of the 1994 “Assault Weapons” Ban.

The anti-gun lobby is staging a “phone-in” tomorrow (Tuesday, February 24th) in opposition to S.659. Though the bill already has enough co-sponsors (54) to ensure passage, a filibuster could still be attempted, which is presumably what the anti-gun side is hoping for.

To ensure our elected officials know they will lose more votes than they gain by supporting a renewal of the AWB, we all need to do our part by calling our Senators and voicing our strong opposition to the Feinstein AWB renewal amendment that will be offered for S.659… not only should this ban not be renewed, it should not be allowed to cloud the issue of whether S.659, an unrelated bill, should be passed.

The anti-gun folks are asking their people to call between the following hours:

9:00 AM – 1:00 PM Eastern Standard Time
8:00 AM – 12:00 PM Central Standard Time
7:00 AM – 11:00 AM Mountain Standard Time
6:00 AM – 10:00 AM Pacific Standard Time

Call 202-224-3121 and ask for one of your Senators’ offices (you’ll have to call back to reach the other one).

Get on it.

Update: Publicola has a very pessimistic take on it. Clayton Cramer has a more optimistic view. I wish I could share Clayton’s enthusiasm. As such, I’d advocate not taking the current situation lightly.

My editorial (which SayUncle readers got a free preview of here) will appear in the February 26 issue of The Prince George’s Sentinel.

Amendment 6:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Yet, today:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday allowed the Bush administration to keep secret all documents in the case of a Middle Eastern man detained for immigration violations after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

In keeping with its record of declining to hear cases challenging the government’s secrecy rules in connection with the Sept. 11 attacks, the court rejected without comment the appeal of a man, identified only by the initials “M.K.B.”

The man’s lawyers contended the secrecy was unconstitutional. They said even the docket, or summary, of the proceedings had been sealed by a federal judge and a U.S. appeals court that considered his challenge to the detention.