Lamar Alexander
The first substantive vote in the gun rights debate this week. It is on the Toomey-Manchin amendment to expand background checks.
I will vote “no.â€Â This amendment would impose a background check system that is overly broad, vague, and ultimately ineffective. And despite the assurances of its supporters, it could easily evolve into a national gun registry that would be an intrusion into the privacy and lives of the American people.
On Thursday, I voted “yes†to start the debate because this is a debate Republicans should want. This is a debate we can win.
I am always ready to debate and defend Second Amendment rights. Why would Tennesseans even want a United States senator who didn’t look forward to debating and defending their Second Amendment rights? Being unwilling to go to the Senate floor to debate and defend Second Amendment rights is like joining the Grand Ole Opry and not being willing to sing.
One of the reasons Republicans don’t have a governing majority is that we often pick the wrong fights. Voting to prevent a debate on gun rights is an argument Republicans will lose with the American people. Defending Second Amendment rights is an argument Republicans will win with the American people.
Some people on the Internet are saying that the procedural vote on Thursday was the last opportunity for a 60-vote requirement on the gun bill. Those people are confused. Almost every vote on amendments to the gun legislation will require 60 votes to pass. If, at the end of the debate, the bill infringes on Second Amendment rights I will vote “no,†and if it does not receive 60 votes at that time, the bill will die.
Let me put it this way: During my 10 years in the U.S. Senate, I have examined every gun amendment by the standard of whether it infringes on Second Amendment rights. During those ten years, the National Rifle Association has given my votes an “A rating.†I am going into this gun rights debate with an “A rating†from the NRA, and I expect my voting record will continue to earn an “A rating†when the debate is over.
Barry Hirsh says
Yeah? Put your vote where your mouth is, Senator.
There is NO so-called “gun safety measure” that does not, by definition, violate “shall not be infringed”.
Dave Smith says
“Barry,” you’re an Internet troll. But I’ve got to hand it to you, you’re Lamar’s kinda people.
steve frank says
I would for the expanded background
check if I could walk into a gun show go pass a check and get a card
saying, I passed. The card could be shown and the sale(s) made with
no records kept for any private sale. To put it bluntly, it is none
of the government’s business what firearms a citizen owns or does not
own. Keeping records on private sales is just one step closer to
registration. If you don’t believe registration leads to confiscation
just ask California. Me, I will not buy from a dealer just because
serial numbers of all gun sales are kept. If Democrats were in the
majority the American people would be looking at a gun ban and that
piece of legislation calls for registration of weapons, with eventual
confiscation.