John Lewis leads sit-in on House Floor to pass gun control legislation.

[Deblano]

Everyone knows my bias on this issue, but i'm finding it really hard to take the Dems seriously on this issue when they weren't willing to vote for the Cornyn bill. Yeah it wasn't the 5 steps forward that they wanted (all no-fly list people banned), but it was at least 1 step forward (all no-fly list people face a brief waiting period during which the Feds can get a court order I.E. minimal due process). The only real justification I've seen for the Dems to vote against it is so they can run ads saying "na na na na GOP luvs terristz". Why wouldn't the "do something anything" vote for the bill that could actually pass other than politics?

Amen. It's a bit hard to take them seriously.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I'm so glad I no longer identify with that party.

So am I.

[Green Line]

Everyone knows my bias on this issue, but i'm finding it really hard to take the Dems seriously on this issue when they weren't willing to vote for the Cornyn bill. Yeah it wasn't the 5 steps forward that they wanted (all no-fly list people banned), but it was at least 1 step forward (all no-fly list people face a brief waiting period during which the Feds can get a court order I.E. minimal due process). The only real justification I've seen for the Dems to vote against it is so they can run ads saying "na na na na GOP luvs terristz". Why wouldn't the "do something anything" vote for the bill that could actually pass other than politics?

My thoughts exactly.  I'd love to see a Democrat actually rebut this.

[MaxQue]

Get the capital police to remove them and continue on with real issues

Like another Obamacare repeal or a bill on bathrooms?

[Wells]

Remember when Republicans did this and Pelosi shut off the lights?

What issue we they sitting in on? Because it probably wasn't gun control.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

House Democrats are now in complete chaos in the House now.

[Wells]

They sang "We Shall Overcome".

[Santander]

As Trump would say:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZCzHYMEIeo

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Everyone knows my bias on this issue, but i'm finding it really hard to take the Dems seriously on this issue when they weren't willing to vote for the Cornyn bill. Yeah it wasn't the 5 steps forward that they wanted (all no-fly list people banned), but it was at least 1 step forward (all no-fly list people face a brief waiting period during which the Feds can get a court order I.E. minimal due process). The only real justification I've seen for the Dems to vote against it is so they can run ads saying "na na na na GOP luvs terristz". Why wouldn't the "do something anything" vote for the bill that could actually pass other than politics?

My thoughts exactly.  I'd love to see a Democrat actually rebut this.

Because the 72 hour waiting period is totally meaningless. What is the point of putting people on that list in the first place if they're deemed to be potentially dangerous enough to be banned from planes but not buy weapons? Buying a gun and shooting up a place is a hell of a lot easier than hijacking a plane and crashing it or getting past security with a bomb.

[Green Line]

Everyone knows my bias on this issue, but i'm finding it really hard to take the Dems seriously on this issue when they weren't willing to vote for the Cornyn bill. Yeah it wasn't the 5 steps forward that they wanted (all no-fly list people banned), but it was at least 1 step forward (all no-fly list people face a brief waiting period during which the Feds can get a court order I.E. minimal due process). The only real justification I've seen for the Dems to vote against it is so they can run ads saying "na na na na GOP luvs terristz". Why wouldn't the "do something anything" vote for the bill that could actually pass other than politics?

My thoughts exactly.  I'd love to see a Democrat actually rebut this.

Because the 72 hour waiting period is totally meaningless. What is the point of putting people on that list in the first place if they're deemed to be potentially dangerous enough to be banned from planes but not buy weapons? Buying a gun and shooting up a place is a hell of a lot easier than hijacking a plane and crashing it or getting past security with a bomb.

Isn't 72 hours enough time for the government to put forward evidence as to why someone is too dangerous to buy a gun?  A lot of people on the No-Fly List are just unfortunate to share the same name as a terrorist.  Is that enough reason to punish them?

And anyways, isn't it a good thing that we are forcing the government to back up their No-Fly list with actual evidence?  Right now, what's the recourse if you get put on the list?  What evidence does the government have to put forward to support it?

[NeverAgain]

Go Democrats!

[Green Line]

What an embarrassment on the House floor right now. 

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Remember when Republicans did this and Pelosi shut off the lights?

What issue we they sitting in on? Because it probably wasn't gun control.

Obamacare. They didn't stay all night, allowed business to continue.

[Deblano]

What an embarrassment on the House floor right now. 

Nothing but a feel-good case of political theater that will accomplish nothing except giving those participating the sit-down the privilege of patting their backs. Maybe Joe Manchin will talk some more about how Due Process is killing the children.

Pathetic.

[Gass3268]

I have never been prouder to be a Democrat than I am tonight.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

There literally is no point to this, they're just wasting time for brownie points for their base back home. It would fail spectacularly in the House should there be a vote.

[Deblano]

There literally is no point to this, they're just wasting time for brownie points for their base back home. It would fail spectacularly in the House should there be a vote.

No, no, no.

Clearly the obstructionist, evil Republicans will respect the resolve of the Democrats participating in the sit-down, and suddenly accept no due process, universal blanket checks, and a wide-reaching ban on assault weapons. That's how this works! /s

[BuckeyeNut]

I'm so glad I no longer identify with that party.

So am I.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Everyone knows my bias on this issue, but i'm finding it really hard to take the Dems seriously on this issue when they weren't willing to vote for the Cornyn bill. Yeah it wasn't the 5 steps forward that they wanted (all no-fly list people banned), but it was at least 1 step forward (all no-fly list people face a brief waiting period during which the Feds can get a court order I.E. minimal due process). The only real justification I've seen for the Dems to vote against it is so they can run ads saying "na na na na GOP luvs terristz". Why wouldn't the "do something anything" vote for the bill that could actually pass other than politics?

My thoughts exactly.  I'd love to see a Democrat actually rebut this.

Because the 72 hour waiting period is totally meaningless. What is the point of putting people on that list in the first place if they're deemed to be potentially dangerous enough to be banned from planes but not buy weapons? Buying a gun and shooting up a place is a hell of a lot easier than hijacking a plane and crashing it or getting past security with a bomb.

Isn't 72 hours enough time for the government to put forward evidence as to why someone is too dangerous to buy a gun?  A lot of people on the No-Fly List are just unfortunate to share the same name as a terrorist.  Is that enough reason to punish them?

And anyways, isn't it a good thing that we are forcing the government to back up their No-Fly list with actual evidence?  Right now, what's the recourse if you get put on the list?  What evidence does the government have to put forward to support it?

What a cop-out. That's an issue with the no-fly list, and Cornyn's bill does nothing to address that.

[Green Line]

Everyone knows my bias on this issue, but i'm finding it really hard to take the Dems seriously on this issue when they weren't willing to vote for the Cornyn bill. Yeah it wasn't the 5 steps forward that they wanted (all no-fly list people banned), but it was at least 1 step forward (all no-fly list people face a brief waiting period during which the Feds can get a court order I.E. minimal due process). The only real justification I've seen for the Dems to vote against it is so they can run ads saying "na na na na GOP luvs terristz". Why wouldn't the "do something anything" vote for the bill that could actually pass other than politics?

My thoughts exactly.  I'd love to see a Democrat actually rebut this.

Because the 72 hour waiting period is totally meaningless. What is the point of putting people on that list in the first place if they're deemed to be potentially dangerous enough to be banned from planes but not buy weapons? Buying a gun and shooting up a place is a hell of a lot easier than hijacking a plane and crashing it or getting past security with a bomb.

Isn't 72 hours enough time for the government to put forward evidence as to why someone is too dangerous to buy a gun?  A lot of people on the No-Fly List are just unfortunate to share the same name as a terrorist.  Is that enough reason to punish them?

And anyways, isn't it a good thing that we are forcing the government to back up their No-Fly list with actual evidence?  Right now, what's the recourse if you get put on the list?  What evidence does the government have to put forward to support it?

What a cop-out. That's an issue with the no-fly list, and Cornyn's bill does nothing to address that.

Yes it does...?  That's the whole point of the waiting period.  It allows the government to present proof that the person on the no fly list is too dangerous to purchase a gun.  It addresses exactly that.

Your answer was more of a cop-out.

[Deblano]

Ben Shapiro's tweets about #NoBillNoBreak are ing hilarious.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Yes it does...?  That's the whole point of the waiting period.  It allows the government to present proof that the person on the no fly list is too dangerous to purchase a gun.  It addresses exactly that.

Your answer was more of a cop-out.

The government presenting proof should occur when the person is initially put on the list. We need to improve the no-fly list; at the beginning. I think we can all agree on that. Cornyn's bill does not fix the initial mistakes.

This debate is about the ease of acquiring guns. It's ridiculously easy to the point that terrorists openly encouraged people to take advantage of it. Cornyn's bill and the other GOP bill did not go far enough. The defeat of these bills wasn't a "we need to do something, anything" because "something, anything" won't fix the easy access to guns.

[Santander]

Am I the only person who sees the irony in the fact that John Lewis has gone from a civil rights leader to leading a protest against civil liberties?

[Deblano]

Am I the only person who sees the irony in the fact that John Lewis has gone from a civil rights leader to leading a protest against civil liberties?

Nope. I'm finding this damn hilarious.

Look guys, we want just ONE vote.....on removing due process.

[Gass3268]

Am I the only person who sees the irony in the fact that John Lewis has gone from a civil rights leader to leading a protest against civil liberties?

Nothing being proposed is against civil liberties, so...