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

Give plan another shot

May 10, 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

Comments

(10)

MrBoB51

May-12-13 9:12 AM

Ron, we get it, you do not like the Constitution or Free Market Capitalism. What else about my Country don't you like? Without Capitalism and the Free Market, how does one get ahead or accrue wealth? They steal it from someone else. Do you like that?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

May-11-13 8:42 PM

Ron1960, The entire idea is to get a wedge in the door. You get it open a crack then you put in a toe to keep it open. You push just a bit more and then you get a foot inside. When you have that foot you get your friends to help you and before you know it you are all crowding inside taking away anything you want. In the gun case, you get concessions on useless background checks, register guns comes next then it might as well be over as they know who has what and where to go to get them. I am against letting them get that wedge in the door. Here in NYS they kicked that door right in. They passed a bunch of crap that is not going to do ANYTHING to help disarm anyone but the taxpaying gun owners. That is NOT going to curb violent crime... not at all.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ron1960

May-11-13 1:57 PM

ToT, Where in the gun background check legislation state any referrence to disarming anyone. If it were not for the so called responsible gun owners who want to make a quick dollar selling their guns to just anyone that has the money to buy it.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

May-11-13 12:13 PM

Scarecrow, usually I agree with you, but, along with lots of people you are looking to treat the symptoms not the root of the problem. ToT and MrBoB are on the right track in their posts. Everybody tends to forget that criminals by their nature do not obey laws. The plan doesn't need another shot, prosecutors need to stop giving away gun charges in plea bargains.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

May-11-13 8:49 AM

You all realize the the term 'assault style weapons' is a newly made-up description for just about any gun that's painted black...you do know that, right? I have several 'assault' screwdrivers and some very large 'assault' c-clamps, an 'assault' KitchenAid planetary mixer and apparently I also have an 'assault' vehicle. Are any of you scared now????

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

May-11-13 8:18 AM

How do we get the lefties to give us the same compassion that they want us to give to Muslims? After an attack that was perpetrated by a Muslim we get the "You cannot judge the many from the actions of the few." WHen will gun owners get that same type of respect? How can you disarm Americans while you say things like this? Many of the gun owning Americans that will be disarmed by new proposed regulations are the very men that fought for our country and would do so again, yet you seek to disarm him? Go hug a terrorist, see how much a muslim loves an infidel. Now please disagree with me so I know you can still read and follow along won't you?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scarecrow57

May-10-13 3:31 PM

Continuing, the only thing background checks prevent are the legal sale of guns. Those sold on the black market are not affected. It isn't that I oppose getting a background check; I just don't see it as a viable tool to keep guns out of the hands of felons. The Mentally illl raise an entirely different set of issues do to doctor patient confidentiality, HIPPA, and a host of other things. How many people will avoid mental health care because their information could end up in the public arena?

The real solution to the gun violence problem is to curb violence in general. Little fact, about 8% of all violent crimes involve a firearm.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scarecrow57

May-10-13 3:27 PM

Ron1960 - As fr the "assault" style guns, I have a problem with that ban. The AR-15 and the Remington 750 (in a .223 semi-automatic) have the same ballistic characteristics and the same firing rate. The difference between the 2 guns is that one is black and one has a mahogny stock. Basically, they are being judged on appearance and not performance. The 750 is just as deadly.

Now let's address the magazines. Let's say we limit them to 10 rounds. Is law enforcement and the military also limited? If not, then there is still a need to manufacture, ship, and have in the reach of the public these larger magazines. Rest assured, there will be plenty of them in the black market. But let us not stop there. Anyone who has ever used a rifle with a magazine knows you can change them out in about 2 seconds or less. So instead of 10 - 30 round magazines you use 30 - 10 round magazines.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ron1960

May-10-13 2:09 PM

Scarecrow, I agree with some of what you say. How ever I would support back ground checks for all gun purchases. I would also supporta ban on that assualt type guns and the large magizines because if these items were not out in the public they could not be stolen and used as they are being used. And in my personal opinion it is the so called responsible gun owner that is selling these types of guns that do not want background checks. how many times every year do we hear about some child getting hold of a gun that belongs to a family member and injures or kills someone, the owner of those guns need to be charged because if they were the responsible gun owner that they claim they are the child could not have gotten hold of then gun. I also agree that the people that the government claims to be so dangerous to the general public need to be not out in the public. But Our government officials just don't have the backbone to do what is needed.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scarecrow57

May-10-13 12:28 PM

Background checks are supposed to keep guns out of the hands of people who are deemed to be an extreme danger to society. Which makes me ask: If these people are so dangerous they can't be trusted with a gun then why are they out walking the streets?

But here is the real problem. The U.S. Constitution (our foundational principles) says that the right of the people (the citizens) shall not be infringed (aka limited) . So by that reading, even is a "citizen" fails a background check they should still be able to buy a gun, or more precisely, armaments. Now don't get me wrong, I think the Charlie Mansons of the World should not have access to guns. But to accomplish that goal we MUST amend the U.S. Constitution, not pass Unconstitutional Legislation.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 10 of 10 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web