The only thing this bill was initially intended to cover was protection for gun makers. Both amendments were voted onto the bill. They didn't "pass", they were accepted as amendments to the original bill. At that point, neither side wanted the bill. It ceased to be palatable for either side. But that doesn't keep them from putting the ban extension on any other bill they want. Just because it failed as an amendment on this bill doesn't mean it will fail on another bill. Do you see what I am saying?
And before this gets out of hand, I have no wish to debate the merits or failings of the bill. I'm actually, if you want to know the truth, starting to move away from my fierce anti-gun stance. This is simply a discussion of legistlative process.
__________________
it's quiet in here
Last edited by Kadath; 03-03-2004 at 07:49 AM..
|