Oklahoma Senator (Coburn-R) Blocks Widely Accepted Gun Bill

[babylonsister]

Oklahoma Senator Blocks Widely Accepted Gun Bill

By Elizabeth Williamson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 3, 2007; A05

The nation's first new firearms law in more than a decade, born of the shooting deaths at Virginia Tech, is being blocked in the Senate by a single lawmaker who says it costs too much.

The bill, which has passed the House on a voice vote, has bipartisan backing and the National Rifle Association's support. It is designed to improve the federal system for checking gun buyers' mental health history in order to block purchases by those diagnosed as mentally ill.

The lawmaker who put the hold on the bill, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), contends that the bill would create "a pathway by which individuals can lose their Second Amendment rights but no pathway through which they can gain them back if they're stable."

"I believe individual rights should be guaranteed," Coburn said.

He said he is even more concerned about the cost, which he contends would run to $2 billion over the next several years. Such legislation "is growing the government without decreasing it somewhere else," he said.

The hold is one of the Senate's most controversial procedural tactics. It allows a single lawmaker to block a vote on legislation. Coburn has holds on about 100 pieces of legislation he opposes. Using dozens of amendments, he also has stalled a raft of spending bills that he says do not explain where the funding will come from for expanded veterans' health care, bridge upgrades and children's health care.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/02/AR2007100202171_pf.html

[BOSSHOG]

1. "2 billion dollars over the next several years"

coburn concerned with "savings" while merrily wasting 3 billion a week in Iraq. Sure coburn I'm with ya, lets arm every fucking mentally unstable citizen in the country. In fact, give them tax credits if they purchase more then two handguns, and chuck in some free ammo.

[mvccd1000]

2. If they fund a way to remove your rights, they SHOULD fund a way...

...to recover those rights.

I don't really care about the cost - an accurate background check system is a pretty important feature.

I just don't like the fact that they provide a way to get your name ON the prohibited purchaser's list, but no way to get it OFF of the list.

The government already does that, to some extent, with convicted felons. States can restore gun rights, but the fed refuses to fund any background checks to restore federal rights. The law says they have to restore those rights after a background check, but there is no funding to do the background check, so your application just goes into a black hole.