DEBATE: S.12 Citizens' Self-Defense Act Options

[Jack Stone]

Mr. President,

They were intended to be four separate amendments: the first adding several new subclauses to clause (a) of section 3; the other three each amending one of the extant subclauses.

I yield.

[Jefferson Pooty]

SEC. 3. RIGHT TO OBTAIN FIREARMS FOR SECURITY, AND TO USE FIREARMS IN DEFENSE OF SELF, FAMILY, OR HOME; ENFORCEMENT.

(a) Reaffirmation of Right- A person not prohibited from receiving a firearm by Section 922(g) of title 18, United States Code, shall have the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms--...

(2) in defense of self or family in the course of the commission by another person of a violent felony against the person or a member of the person’s family; and

(3) in defense of the person’s home in the course of the commission of a felony by another person.;

"(4) in defense of a ship, boat or other watercraft against piratical attacks;

(5) to prevent, or to secure the escape from, unlawful confinement of oneself or of another person;

(6) to prevent or end the taking or holding of hostages; and

(7) to safeguard the lawful authority and independence of the United States, and of the individual regions, against invasion or insurrection."

SEC. 3. RIGHT TO OBTAIN FIREARMS FOR SECURITY, AND TO USE FIREARMS IN DEFENSE OF SELF, FAMILY, OR HOME; ENFORCEMENT.

(a) Reaffirmation of Right- A person not prohibited from receiving a firearm by Section 922(g) of title 18, United States Code, shall have the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms--

(1) in defense of self or family their companions, or other innocent persons against a reasonably perceived threat of imminent and unlawful infliction of serious bodily injury;

SEC. 3. RIGHT TO OBTAIN FIREARMS FOR SECURITY, AND TO USE FIREARMS IN DEFENSE OF SELF, FAMILY, OR HOME; ENFORCEMENT.

(a) Reaffirmation of Right- A person not prohibited from receiving a firearm by Section 922(g) of title 18, United States Code, shall have the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms--....

(2) in defense of self or family their companions, or other innocent persons in the course of the commission by another person of a violent felony against the person or a member of the person’s family; and

SEC. 3. RIGHT TO OBTAIN FIREARMS FOR SECURITY, AND TO USE FIREARMS IN DEFENSE OF SELF, FAMILY, OR HOME; ENFORCEMENT.

(a) Reaffirmation of Right- A person not prohibited from receiving a firearm by Section 922(g) of title 18, United States Code, shall have the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms--....

(3) in defense of the person’s home , or any home where they are a guest, in the course of the commission of a felony by another person.

24 hours to vote on MacLeod I, II, III, and IV

This post has been edited by Jefferson Pooty: 25 August 2009, 15:16

[Peter Fossil]

Aye on MacLeod I, II, III, and IV

[Benjamin Kalrade]

AYE on All MacLeod Amendments

[Kowalchuk]

Aye on All MacLeod

[Ian Joyce]

AYE on all Winters
AYE on all MacLeod

[Jefferson Pooty]

Winters I fails by a vote of 4 ayes to 13 nays

Winters II fails by a vote of 5 ayes to 12 nays

Winters III fails by a vote of 6 ayes to 11 nays.

the vote from the gentleman from Cascadia was discounted for being late.

[Victor Bradshaw]

Nay on all MacLeod

[Vincent Halfhyde]

Aye on all MacLeod


Mr. President,

There's nothing controversial or objectionable about a law-abiding citizen helping out to foil a felonious assault or burglary in a home where he is a guest. That's just plain common sense. Do we expects guests in our homes to just sit there and read a magazine while we are fighting off dangerous criminals? The only people who benefit from such a situation are the criminals.

The other MacLeod amendments are similar, and are perfectly reasonable common-sense provisions we would do well to uphold.

I yield.

[Clay]

Mr. President,

First, I move to amend Section 3.a.3 to so that any instance of "felony" will now read "violent felony" in order to bring it into line with Section 3.a.2.

Second, as to regards of the first MacLeod Amendment, if the gentleman from Montana could clarify under what circumstances he would see the proposed clause 6 be in effect, I would greatly appreciate it. Until though, I vote present on MacLeod I.

Aye on MacLeod II.
Aye on MacLeod III.

I yield.

[Cathy Willerton]

Aye on all MacLeod

[Ian Joyce]

Second Winters

[Brocklin]

Aye on all MacLeod

UPDATED VOTE LATER

This post has been edited by Brocklin: 24 August 2009, 19:09

[Vincent Halfhyde]

Mr. President,

If somebody's breaking into my home, that is a felony but I am not going to wait until the felon becomes violent before I defend myself and my family. The legislation is worded the way it is because any law-abiding person shouldn't have to wait until a criminal begins committing physical violence, inside his own home, before being able to defend himself.

This is why I oppose the newly proposed Winters amendment. It's just another effort to yank the teeth out of this bill, and to propagate the unjust laws that help the real criminals and turn law-abiding citizens who defend themselves into criminals for just trying to protect their family and their home.

I yield.

[Clay]

Mr. President,

The gentleman from California's statements on my motives are not only wrong, but insulting and I ask he be called to order for impugning of motives upon a member of this body. The reasoning behind my amendment is something I would hope he would understand, having been in the Senate for some time; that if we are going to pass a piece of legislation, would should perhaps read it, understand what it does, and ensure that it would actually make a good law instead of whatever pleases our particular fancy of the moment.

Considering as all of the concerns I have with this legislation have been shouted down by members of this body who seem to be more focused on pleasing the NRA than sound policy, I will continue to do my job - ask questions, probe for answers, and work to change what will make a piece of legislation less effective in doing its job. If the gentleman from California would like to address of my concerns, I welcome his efforts; if he wants to remain whipped into a foaming lather about any word I say, he is welcome to do so as well, but I ask he please exit the chambers to get himself under control for the viewers back home on C-SPAN. Considering that we are expected to act as leaders and role models, some semblance of intelligent civic discourse would be a plus.

I yield.

[JPJ]

Aye on all Macleod Amendments

Though I am concerned about Provision 6 of Amendment I, Mr. President. I think such matters should be left in the hands of law enforcement, for the sake of the safety of any hostages taken.

I yield.

[Richards]

Aye on all MacLeod

[BLT]

Mr. President,

The Winters Amendments, if their opponents had bothered to consider their actual effect, would have resulted in a more complete and useful bill for all sides of the debate, and to suggest that they would have increased gun control restrictions is dishonest in the extreme. I am extremely disappointed by their failure, for while this bill remains a force for good, it could have accomplished far more, and done so in a clearer manner.

Nay on MacLeod I
Aye on MacLeod II
Aye on MacLeod III
Present on MacLeod IV

I yield.

[Morrison]

Aye on all MacLeod

[A. J. Dresner]

Aye on the Macleod amendments, Mr. President.