The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: tt11758 on February 29, 2012, 10:53:32 AM
-
http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/02/29/house-democrats-have-left-the-iowa-capitol-in-protest-in-an-undisclosed-location/ (http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/02/29/house-democrats-have-left-the-iowa-capitol-in-protest-in-an-undisclosed-location/)
Iowa House Democrats have just left the Capitol in protest of two gun bills the Republican majority plans to debate today that critics contend would make the state part of the “Wild, Wild West.”
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy accused House Leader Linda Upmeyer of failing to properly inform legislators about planned debate today on the bills. The short notice hindered Democrats from offering amendments to improve the bills, McCarthy said.
But Upmeyer, R-Garner, shot back this morning that Democrats did have adequate warning, and suggested their flight from the Capitol was more about making a political scene.
“Iowans didn’t send us down here just to do easy stuff,” she said. “The Second Amendment is a question that many Iowans would like placed before them. I don’t know why they’re afraid to have a debate on a subject just because they don’t like the subject. That seems ludicrous to me.”
One bill would alter the state constitution to specifically include gun rights. Another would rewrite the law on “reasonable force” so that a person may use force — including deadly force — against someone who they believe threatens to kill or cause serious injury or who is committing a violent felony.
“(Upmeyer) said they will debate those bills today whether we like it or not,” said McCarthy, D-Des Moines. “I told her that we’ve been double crossed, and we will not be debating those bills today.”
In response, Democrats have moved to an undisclosed location. Republicans hold 60 of 100 seats and could debate the bill without Democrats since they have a quorum, but that would be highly unusual, McCarthy said.
“We have been double crossed as a caucus, and we’re not going to sit back and be treated with historic misuse of power,” McCarthy said.
When met by a reporter after the Republicans adjourned from a party caucus, Upmeyer rejected McCarthy’s argument. The gun bills were noticed in the same manner as any other bill that could come before the House, she said — in a calendar that is updated and circulated to lawmakers everyday.
When Democrats asked this morning what the Republicans intended to bring up, Upmeyer said she gave them a list of non-controversial bills, but left consideration of other bills “open-ended.”
“Every member knows that anything that comes out of committee and is placed on the calendar is eligible,” Upmeyer said.
A House spokeswoman added that Democrats had in fact already offered an amendment to one of the gun bills, indicating that they had had ample time to develop proposed changes.
Upmeyer said she was not sure whether the House would convene and begin considering bills in the Democrats’ absence. As of 10:30 a.m., the chamber remained at ease, with Republican lawmakers sitting casually at their desks or chatting in small groups on the House floor.
Here are the bills:
House Joint Resolution 2009: Iowa Right to Keep and Bear Arms State Constitutional Amendment
This resolution would begin a process to amend Iowa’s constitution to include a “right to keep and bear arms.” The proposed amendment echoes the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, saying “The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
To pass, the resolution must be approved by both the House and the Senate in two consecutive general assemblies before voters would weigh in on the issue. It means that the earliest a vote could occur would be 2013, should the legislature act this year and next.
House File 2215: Reasonable force/Stand your ground
The bill would rewrites the law on “reasonable force” so that a person may use force — including deadly force — against someone who they believe threatens to kill or cause serious injury, or who is committing a violent felony. The bill specifically says that a person is presumed to be justified in using deadly force if the person reasonably believes that deadly force is necessary to avoid injury or risk to his or her life.
Iowa’s current law allows potential victims to use deadly force against a perceived threat only if an alternative course of action also entails “a risk to life or safety.”
Personally, I hope the Republicans extend a big middle finger to these whiny-ass crybabies, and debate (and pass) these bills anyway!!
Both are good bills, and would strengthen the gains that have been made in the area of gun rights in this state in the past couple of years.
By the way, the "critcs" quoted in the first paragraph are made up largely of the Editorial Boad of the DesMoines Register (Motto: The newspaper liberal democrats depend on). This is the same old bullshit fear mongering tactic they tried before "Shall-Issue" came into effect. I got news for you, assholes, it didn't happen then and it won't happen now.
Bunch of no-good, bush-whackin, razza-frazzin, goll-durn offspring of unmarried parents!!!
Great, now I gotta go take another blood pressure pill. >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
Not sure how much notice the Dems require, but I've been getting emails from the Iowa Firearms Coalition and NRA-ILA for more than a couple of days informing ME that today was the day. Maybe the Dems should get put on those mailing lists. ;D
-
Keep us informed on this, Tom.
-
The Dems must have learned that "stunt" from the same bunch of loser Libs in Wisconsin.....Either that or the French,...
I caught this today at work on the radio.....
You know what the Dems remind me of when the do this?
(http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m256/ammcf/temper_tantrum.jpg)
(http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f59/cforum/Blinkies/tantrum.gif)
In response, Democrats have moved to an undisclosed location. Republicans hold 60 of 100 seats and could debate the bill without Democrats since they have a quorum, but that would be highly unusual, McCarthy said.
So is fleeing to an undisclosed location,......If the Reps. have a quorum,,,,,,,,PASS IT....Screw them...
-
It is time that someone educate these elected officials on the "wild wild west." For those that have moved on past Roy Rogers and Tom Mix, it is well known that the main street stand off is creation of Hollywood. I won't go into all the things we have learned over the years, but just like mixing up antlers and horns, or magazines and clips, the wild wild west characterization shows their ignorance.
-
One thing they haven't learned is that the "Wild West" wasn't all that wild since most people WORKED from sun up to sun down.
Just the sort of thing you'd expect from people who are more concerned with whats "fair", than with how reality functions.
-
The "Wild West" argument is right out of the ol' playbook,.... It FAILED when the anti's tried it when Florida was one of the first states to pass CCW.
They screamed and whined about the "Wild West", when they passed CCW in 1995 when I lived in NC....(I was No. 2 in line the day the law was enacted)....
There is post here somewhere in the archives,....about the relative "quiet" in the ol' Wild West.....with a posted link from the history channel. Where gunfights, and shootouts were actually seldom, and infrequent....
Granted there were frontier towns that had violence, but guess what? Guns stifled it in short order. The bad elements were killed or wounded, and towns like Dodge City, Tombstone, etc,....actually thrived when the riff-raff was dispatched.
Perhaps TomB, with his strong google-fu, can find it, I tried and couldn't find it.
;D
-
The Dem's behave this way because there are no consequences to their behavior. None. Ever.
-
Not only should they vote on and pass this legislation, they should then take a vote to start impeachment proceedings for the those who abandoned their duty and responsibility to represent their constituency.
Give them 8 hours notice that the vote will be taken and see how much they fuss over not being given enough notice.
-
The people in the districts who's representatives are refusing to represent them should start recall proceedings.
But since they were the ones who elected these cry babies in the first place it's not likely.
-
Put me in one the side that hopes this thing passes.
If they can't point out their issues against this without jumping up and leaving, they have no argument.
Pass it.
-
I was listening to the radio on my way to ... well ahhhh ... to ... ahhhh ... OK, it is league night, and I was playing with guns!
On the news they stated that the Dems stormed out of the capital in protest. However, Iowa law just requires a simple majority, and the GOP has over sixty there. They can conduct business and pass this if they wish.
The DEMS notified the press that they are upset because they claim they did not get fair notice that this was coming. They also said they are all together in Des Moines.
#1. I hope that they wait for the cry babies to come back and pass it with them there. That way there will be no whining that this was done in the dark allies;
#2. What happened to the open meeting laws? If elected officials can not gather in a setting without prior public notice, how can these clowns all be together and not breaking the law?
-
The "Wild West" argument is right out of the ol' playbook,.... It FAILED when the anti's tried it when Florida was one of the first states to pass CCW.
They screamed and whined about the "Wild West", when they passed CCW in 1995 when I lived in NC....(I was No. 2 in line the day the law was enacted)....
There is post here somewhere in the archives,....about the relative "quiet" in the ol' Wild West.....with a posted link from the history channel. Where gunfights, and shootouts were actually seldom, and infrequent....
Granted there were frontier towns that had violence, but guess what? Guns stifled it in short order. The bad elements were killed or wounded, and towns like Dodge City, Tombstone, etc,....actually thrived when the riff-raff was dispatched.
Perhaps TomB, with his strong google-fu, can find it, I tried and couldn't find it.
;D
Archive doesn't seem to go back that far :-[
-
IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN!! Blood will run in the streets!
Of course these are the same arguments that preceded Arizona's CCW without a permit. ::)
BTW, none of this has happened in AZ since non-permit concealed carry was allowed....go figure.
Iowa became a state 66 years before Arizona. Pity the politicians didn't learn anything in that period of time.
-
I was listening to the radio on my way to ... well ahhhh ... to ... ahhhh ... OK, it is league night, and I was playing with guns!
On the news they stated that the Dems stormed out of the capital in protest. However, Iowa law just requires a simple majority, and the GOP has over sixty there. They can conduct business and pass this if they wish.
The DEMS notified the press that they are upset because they claim they did not get fair notice that this was coming. They also said they are all together in Des Moines.
#1. I hope that they wait for the cry babies to come back and pass it with them there. That way there will be no whining that this was done in the dark allies;
#2. What happened to the open meeting laws? If elected officials can not gather in a setting without prior public notice, how can these clowns all be together and not breaking the law?
First off: m58, be not offended that I neither answered nor returned your phone call on this subject last evening. I was setting up for a Carry Permit Class inside a steel building and the phone didn't ring. In addition, it was after 10 before I found your voicemail, and thought it impolite to phone you at that hour of the night when nobody was dead or even bleeding bad.
The crybabies Dems finally returned after about an 8-hour absence, at which time the bills, after lengthy debate, were passed (mostly along party lines), and sent to the Iowa Senate.
Video, as well as the text quoted below, can be found at the following link: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20120301/NEWS/303010062/After-Iowa-legislative-walkout-gun-bills-advance (http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20120301/NEWS/303010062/After-Iowa-legislative-walkout-gun-bills-advance)
The Iowa House advanced controversial legislation on Wednesday evening to loosen Iowa’s deadly-force law and write expansive gun rights into the state constitution.
The approvals, reached on near party-line votes, followed not only lengthy debate but also an hours-long — and, according to some, unprecedented — delay forced by the chamber’s Democratic minority, which fled the Capitol to protest the Republican majority’s decision to consider the bills.
Democrats argued that the measures fell outside the demands of “mainstream” Iowans (BULLSHIT!!) and wasted time that could be better spent on pursuing legislation that improves the state’s economy.
“When we started the session, we were told we would focus on the economy and jobs, and we were told we would avoid divisive issues,” Rep. Mary Mascher, D-Iowa City, said during the debate Wednesday evening. “We were lied to.”
Republicans, however, argued the proposed state constitutional amendment was necessary to clarify the state’s commitment to gun rights and resist potential restrictions by courts.
“This provides protections from future Supreme Court decisions that would limit or prohibit our rights to keep and bear arms,” said Rep. Matt Windschitl, R-Missouri Valley.
The proposed amendment, House Joint Resolution 2009, would bar the state from infringing on or denying a person’s right to “acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms” and would prohibit firearm licensing, registration or special taxation.
The amendment would not nullify existing gun laws, Windschitl and others said, but would allow those laws to be challenged in court and perhaps invalidated.
As a constitutional amendment, the measure must be approved by both the House and Senate and then approved again by both chambers in a subsequent year. It would then go to the voters for ratification.
The second controversial (controversial in the opinion of the ultra-liberal rag, the DSM Register) bill, House File 2115, approved Wednesday night rewrites the law on “reasonable force,” so that a person could use force — including deadly force — against someone who they believe either threatens to kill or cause serious injury or is committing a violent felony.
Under the bill, a person would be presumed justified in using deadly force if he or she reasonably believed that deadly force was necessary to avoid the risk of injury or death. Iowa’s current law allows potential victims to use deadly force against a perceived threat only if an alternative course of action also entails “a risk to life or safety.” (This would be an improvement to current law, in that it would give the victim the right to "stand their ground")
Windschitl, the bill’s sponsor, invoked the case of Jay Rodney Lewis when calling for its approval on Wednesday. The West Des Moines man, whose story was reported by The Des Moines Register, spent 112 days in jail after firing on two men who accosted him last October. He was ultimately acquitted of counts of intimidation with a dangerous weapon and going armed with intent.
Lewis could have avoided the charges and the jail time altogether, Windschitl said, if the bill under consideration had been law.
Democrats did not speak out against the bill Wednesday night, although they voted almost uniformly against it and earlier in the day circulated a news release saying it would “essentially turn the streets of Iowa into the Wild West.” (Wasn't that a movie starring Will Smith?)
Both measures now move to the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats. (Don't look for it to emerge from that body, at least not before being completely eviscerated.)
The House’s Republican majority had intended to begin debating the gun legislation and several other bills on Wednesday morning, but was delayed when the Democratic minority left the Capitol en masse at around 10 a.m. and refused to return until after 4 p.m.
Democrats walked out because Republicans failed to provide proper notice about their plans to debate the bills on Wednesday, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said, leaving his party without time to draw up and offer changes to the bills.
“We have been double-crossed as a caucus,” McCarthy, D-Des Moines, said. “We’re not going to sit back and be treated with historic misuse of power.” (Insert "WHINY" emoticon here)
But Republican House Leader Linda Upmeyer, R-Garner, shot back that Democrats did have adequate warning, and suggested their flight from the Capitol was an attempt to make a political scene.
“Iowans didn’t send us down here just to do easy stuff,” she said. “The Second Amendment is a question that many Iowans would like placed before them. I don’t know why they’re afraid to have a debate on a subject just because they don’t like the subject. That seems ludicrous to me.”
Republicans hold a 60-to-40 majority in the House, which allows them to set the calendar for debate and largely control the legislative process.
The Democrats were incommunicado for much of the day, reaching out from their undisclosed location at midafternoon only to suggest to House Speaker Kraig Paulsen that they would return only if Republicans set aside the gun legislation for the day.
That, however, was a nonstarter for the GOP. “Someone doesn’t get to have a tantrum and leave the Capitol and all of a sudden we’re changing the debate schedule,” Paulsen said. “That’s not how that works.” (Whaddaya know, a group of Republicans who grew a pair, and ACTED like the majority party! I didn't think that was possible.)
The Democrats’ six-hour disappearance was unprecedented in recent memory, lawmakers and others said.
Gov. Terry Branstad, who appeared in the House chamber Wednesday afternoon for a Black History Month program that was cut short by the Democrats’ absence, said he could not recall a similar situation in Iowa.
“I think most people think that when you’re elected to serve, you should be there when duty calls,” said Branstad, who served in the Legislature in the 1970s and also was governor from 1983 to 1999.
Longtime lawmaker Stewart Iverson, R-Clarion, said it’s not uncommon for a party caucus to hold an extended private meeting in order to delay consideration of a bill, but that he couldn’t recall lawmakers absconding from the Capitol as the Democrats did Wednesday.
“It’s a little unusual that they actually left the building, but it’s not unusual to go to caucus and spend several hours there,” Iverson said.
Democrats returned shortly after 4 p.m., held a news conference and then returned to the House floor to open debate.
The debate began at about 4:40 p.m., about eight hours after the House initially convened, and wrapped up shortly after 8 p.m.
Comments appearing in bold print in the above quote are the opinions of this poster. Your mileage may vary. Or not. I really don't care. ;D
-
Damn Sam! I missed another of your classes :'( One of these days I will get there ;D
-
Damn Sam! I missed another of your classes :'( One of these days I will get there ;D
Saturday, April 7th.
Last night's was a private class. A group of friends that contacted me to do a private group session for them.