Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS

NRA Shouldn’t Have Issues With Manchin Plan

May 13, 2013

U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin seems determined to gain full Senate approval of updates to federal background check rules for prospective gun buyers. Though the amendment he and Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




May-23-13 3:59 PM

A Protest the NY SAFE ACT Rally will be held in Albany on Tuesday June 11th.Deluxe bus leaves from D&F Plaza at 2:30AM and returns from Albany at 2:30PM,coffee and donuts provided,stops at mid-point both ways,seats are $50 and must have a reservation(pre-paid),Contact Bill at 716-672-6210.A lot of folks on this board agree the law is wrong so "Get ON The Bus"(you can to GioAllie-maybe it would open your eyes)

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-22-13 11:33 AM

OK so you get a GUN Background Check. WHO is doing the check? Is it going to be say like that the IRS did to people trying to get a 401(c)(4)background check?

So who decides YOUR LIBERTY? Isn't that TYRANNY? England said that George Washington should not have a gun cause they fought for Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

England would have called George a TERRORIST. We call him a FOUNDING Father with a GUN.

George, pour George, he would have been turned down for a gun permit...ahhh George what you going to do? GET ONE ANYWAY!!!!


1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-18-13 11:04 PM

GioAllie, "that defeated amendment called for nothing to be given up"

Wrong. The defeated amendment would have required me to give up money to pay for a background check. If the background checks were taxpayer funded, the background checks did not cause a delay in the sale and all federally licensed firearms dealers were required to immediately perform the instant background checks for private sales, then I would support it. Why should I have to pay a $40 fee, or whatever it would be, to sell an old single shot shotgun for $75 to a friend whom I know is not a felon?

No records of transactions should be kept. The government has no need to know how many and which models of firearms I own if the firearms do not require a federal permit (automatic weapons) to own.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-15-13 1:23 PM

I also am a gun owner.....but please tell me how this prevents weapons from getting into the hands of criminals? They don't buy their guns legally!! The mentally unstable are still protected by privacy rights. This is mere grandstanding. Let's go back the old days of lock up looney bins and electroshock therapy. Let's make meaningful punishments for violent offenders such as castration. Limit the testosterone, limit the aggression. Extreme? Yes. But I guarantee it would have a stronger effect than background checks.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-15-13 12:33 PM

The hypocrisy is truly astounding. When the government tries to ban or regulate firearms people argue against it by noting the fact that tools don;t cause harm, people using those tools do. Yet here we have proposed laws that go after the people - the ones who should not have certain efficient tools to hurt others - and we still get slippery slope scare tactics about gun confiscation!

I am a firearms owner and I agree that bans and other laws that address hardware only simply don't work. Laws that look at the people, however, to keep the wrong people from getting guns in the first place, have my support.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-15-13 12:08 PM

wake up sir--the comment of mine that is quoted, was in no way a joke or humorous response--quit distorting people's comments ,unless that's the extent of your material on this issue.....Sen. Toomey is a much more credible source than you or the NRA........

0 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-15-13 9:36 AM

the amount of ignorance proudly displayed by some on the right is truly sad--this issue, as is the case with other issues is far from a joking matter. The life of a child is sacred, to most here, regardless of political affiliation.......the 7:59am post is a vivid example of sick humor.

0 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-15-13 7:33 AM

for the last time for the totally uniformed on this issue--that defeated amendment called for nothing to be given up-------but you knew that.

0 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 9:43 PM

Gun violence has nothing to do with the rash of kids being suspended in school for idiotic "gun" violations. It's the liberal gun phobes in educator positions.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 5:06 PM

I have many liberal and republican friends and clients, and none hate guns to my knowledge, they do however hate gun violence......doesn't everyone?

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 4:04 PM

perhaps Sen. Manchin isn't interested in "polls in his own state"- there are some in the senate that are blessed with consciences, and those vote on the merits of bills not on orders from Mcconnel.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 2:52 PM

ok so lets say background checks are in place.....what is to keep me from selling my gun to someone a criminal without going through a background check? Answer nothing. The only difference it will make is that after the criminal has committed their crime, maybe been caught, somehow traced the gun back to me, maybe I will get a fine. That is only good after the crime has been please explain how this curbs gun violence.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 2:36 PM

Interesting that Toomey blamed the Repubs but Manchin blamed the NRA for coming out against it.

Perhaps Toomey and Manchin are to blame for trying to cobble something together that sounded good but would have made no difference in gun safety, all in the name of politics.

Also interesting that I can find all kinds of articles on polls showing Toomey got a 3-4 point bump in favorable rating from the Phili liberals in Pa but no one is mentioning how the polls are treating Manchin in his own state.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 12:19 PM

here's a great idea--have McConnell or anyone offer an amendment with wording to make it illegal for a gun registry but would close the loopholes in an amendment dealing only with background checks. Wanna bet if voted on it would fail also--back to Sen. Toomey's statement. The right will not allow anything to pass, as promised, that is supported by this president---FACT.

0 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 12:14 PM

the degree of denial is staggering in this discussion--how can you all simply ignore what the republican sponsor clearly stated as the reason for defeat of the amendment? Did you all also forget McConnell's promise 5 years ago?

1 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 11:57 AM

You don't have to CALL it a registry, when you have permanent record keeping of gun owners it has the same effect. The government has the names of gun owners and knows where to go to confiscate them when they want. Just ask Gov Cuomo.

Both Toomey and Manchin are on record as trying to get a bill the gun owners would accept. It failed because the liberals insisted on permanent records rather than destroying them once the buyer passed the check. Most Repubs and some Dems voted as the voters in heavy gun owner districts asked.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 9:29 AM

"there was nothing in that AMMENDMENT that referenced a "registry.".Sen.Toomey-R- stated clearly why the amendment was defeated, and it had nothing to do with registries or the constitution--" You can not have a system of background checks without maintaining records of gun ownership! Please tell me if I am wrong and that is possible and explain how that is possible.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 8:46 AM

Turns out the Mother's Day parade suspect has had previous arrests for drugs and firearms. He must have gotten his latest gun off the internet or at a gun way did he purchase it illegally! This would have been prevented if only we had universal background checks in place.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 8:42 AM

This bill does nothing but increase the cost to taxpayers and gun purchasers. Criminals are criminals because they do not obey the law, so why do people seem to believe that a criminal will obey the "New Feel Good" law. If history is any indicator, gun laws increase violence and crime. You will just cause more police officers to be hit over the head with a bat for his gun. If the senate was interested in reducing the kind of events that took place at Sandy Hook, they would stop "Gun Free Zones" and support CCW for teachers. Go out an sponser NRA style gun classes for the public. Reduce the tax on ammo so that practice would be more affordable.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 7:44 AM

there was nothing in that AMMENDMENT that referenced a "registry.".Sen.Toomey-R- stated clearly why the amendment was defeated, and it had nothing to do with registries or the constitution--

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-14-13 4:43 AM

The reason the NRA fought the bill was because it "mandated" permanent record keeping of transactions. Schumer refused to budge on this and it is the reason the bill failed.

How could anyone living in NY not see where this would lead?

Background checks are already done on internet sales and have been for some time.

Per the just released Justice Dept report less than 2% of guns used by criminals are purchased at gun shows.

In spite of Manchin/Toomey efforts this bill would do nothing to deter crime and would hurt the law abiding gun owner. It died the death it deserved.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-13-13 4:47 PM

the article speaks of re-tooling the amendment to satisfy some fears from the right, but that would make no difference, because Sen. Toomey-R hit the nail on the head with his expose. Of course the "NRA" shouldn't have issues, they don't need to. Those 50+ senators will do their bidding regardless of the amendment presented, as Toomey accurately stated.

1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-13-13 10:25 AM

"ignorance is bliss"

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-13-13 9:58 AM

Toomey exposed the real reason the "amendment" went down. Something to do about the right's hate for this president, and anything he supports.

2 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-13-13 9:52 AM

no mention of sen. Toomey-R----hmmmmmmm

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 33 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web