How do laws work?

[Dave Gray]

I'm honestly asking, because there's something I don't understand.

I do know that most times laws are super complicated and a bunch of stuff in a bill is to get votes and have pork and riders and all other kinds of stuff to get it to pass.  In most cases, like with big health care bills or massive budget legislation, I understand that that's just the reality of how it works.

But, say, for something like gun control, could the Democrats put a "clean" bill on the floor that outlawed ownership and purchase of firearms to convicted felons.  I would think that would be able to pass.  We have already established that felons can lose rights, like voting.  And while there are some that might be against it for slippery slope reasons, in general -- nobody wants felons owning guns.  So it seems like you could just take steps that way.

And it seems like you could do it tomorrow.   And if people voted against that, you could choose to vote them out or not.

Why can't this happen?   I legitimately don't understand.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Before you vote on a bill you must vote to end debate. 

In the house half the reps must agree to end debate.  So if the law has support to pass it gets voted on.  I was on one committee where if 5 out of 11 were tired of talking about the issue we closed debate and voted one way or the other.  In almost every democratic body on the planet you need either the same number of people to end debate as to pass the bill/resolution or less people to close debate. 

The senate is different.  You need 60 out of 100 to end debate so effectively you need 60 votes to pass any law. 

[Dave Gray]

The senate is different.  You need 60 out of 100 to end debate so effectively you need 60 votes to pass any law. 

Yeah, I get it.

So, can't you get people to end the debate on banning firearm ownership or purchase for convicted felons?

[CF DolFan]

It would be nice if they could pass laws without other crap crammed in but that's not how politics work. They have to grease people's palms to get any vote passed and it is rediculous on so many levels.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Yeah, I get it.

So, can't you get people to end the debate on banning firearm ownership or purchase for convicted felons?

Actually most states ban ownership of firearms by felons.  But they don’t mandate that all of the people who provide firearms to others to verify they aren’t felons.

Best analogy would be: our current alcohol laws except if a 17 year old standing outside gave 22 year some cash to a 22 year old alcoholic who went in and bought two bottles booze - 17 took one and the 22 year old keep one and in such a case the 17 year old broke the law but the 22 year old was under no obligation to make sure the 17 year old was old enough.  So all night long the bum hangs out in front of the booze store. And there is nothing the police can do because they can't ask the minors for id unless they already know they are under 21.

That is the gun show loophole.  Criminal love it because they can get guns without background checks.  Sellers love it cause they can charge a hefty premium.  

If the goal is to make alcohol more expensive for minors but absolutely do nothing to actually stop underage drinking it is a great loophole.  Same thing here.

[Spider-Dan]

So, can't you get people to end the debate on banning firearm ownership or purchase for convicted felons?

As Hoodie mentioned, you cannot get the necessary 10 Republicans in the Senate to agree to any sort of enforcement mechanism (e.g. requiring background checks for gun purchases), which effectively means any such legislation is DOA.