the not-so-sweet 16

In one of the United States' most lopsided gun votes in the nation's recent history, there was broad, bi-partisan support for a recent pro-gun bill in the Senate. 

Of the entire senate, a measly 16 Senators voted against Senator Vitter's legislation to prohibit the usage of taxpayer funds from the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill to be used for the purpose of confiscating lawfully owned guns in the event of an emergency, such as what occurred in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. 

They were all democrats: 

Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)

Of all times to confiscate weapons, though they are all bad, the period directly after a disaster with widespread lawlessness when self-defense is most crucial, is most certainly one of the worst to choose.  These 16 democrats stuck with their anti-gun, anti-2nd amendment convictions and voted against this legislation. 

All OTHER 28 democrats in the senate, joined by every one of the 55 republicans voted for this common sense legislation. 

>>70
Sure.  But the democrats want to take away that backup plan, or last resort, whatever you want to call it.  Not many gun owners are wanting a violent revolution.  They only want it as a security measure.

>>64
Gun control trumps any qualms you may have with the republicans, or should.  Which is worse, restricting the 'rights' of 10% of the population, or restricting the rights of 100% of the population (including that 10 percent, obviously) through gun control?

>>69
Yes, exactly. 

>>65 Nice link.

>>61
"Women's rights, more tolerance for non-heterosexuals, sound fiscal policy, people who at least try to govern instead of ruining the systems until they have to be strapped altogether, health care that doesn't siphon money for paperwork, non-regressive taxation, better air, better schools and so on."

High taxing and high spending is not "sound fiscal policy."  Cutting taxes & spending, and returning the money to the hands of those who earned it is the best idea. 

Nationalized health care is a shitty idea.  There is nothing wrong with letting the market handle health care.  People who eat right, exercise, and take care of their health shouldn't have to pay for the consequences of the actions of those who don't. 

"more tolerance for non-heterosexuals"

You can't legislate tolerance.  Tolerance is something that people need to learn.  If gays were armed and had the self-defense rights commonly denied them throughout the USA (thanks to your liberals), they would be better able to defend themselves from the gay haters. 

The next time some gay man gets assaulted in a bathroom, and has a toilet plunger shoved up his ass by a bunch of homophobic jocks, and isn't able to defend himself because the democrats denied concealed carry rights for the area in which he lives, who are you going to direct your critisizm at, the republicans who fought for his right to carry concealed weaponry and defend himself, or the democrats who fought to take it away?