Toomey And Manchin Sign Suicide Pact On Guns
BY Herschel Smith
11 years ago
A pair of bipartisan senators on Wednesday announced they’ve reached an agreement over a bill to expand background checks for gun sales, marking a significant first step as Congress attempts to tackle the thorny issue of gun control. While the Senate is now one step closer to actually voting on the legislation, the bill’s fate remains far from certain, its authors acknowledged.
“I think this is a fluid situation, and it’s hard to predict,” said Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., one of the drafters of the background check bill, said of the legislation’s chances. He added, however, that the legislation represents common ground and that he’s “hopeful” it can pass.
“Criminals and the dangerously mentally ill shouldn’t have guns,” Toomey said. “I don’t know anyone who disagrees with that premise.”
You’re a liar. That criminals and the dangerously mentally ill shouldn’t have guns isn’t your premise. Your premise is that what you propose for universal background checks would have any effect on criminals and the dangerously mentally ill having guns. I think you know that this is a false premise and doesn’t comport with the facts and data. In fact, let me remind you just why the left really wants universal background checks.
The only way we can truly be safe and prevent further gun violence is to ban civilian ownership of all guns. That means everything. No pistols, no revolvers, no semiautomatic or automatic rifles. No bolt action. No breaking actions or falling blocks. Nothing. This is the only thing that we can possibly do to keep our children safe from both mass murder and common street violence.
Unfortunately, right now we can’t. The political will is there, but the institutions are not. Honestly, this is a good thing. If we passed a law tomorrow banning all firearms, we would have massive noncompliance. What we need to do is establish the regulatory and informational institutions first. This is how we do it. The very first thing we need is national registry. We need to know where the guns are, and who has them.
Thus ends two non-remarkable careers in politics. I hope you enjoy your new buddies, Pat.
UPDATE: David Codrea asks:
Why Toomey felt compelled to take this stance, particularly noting the slim margin he was elected to office by and the likelihood that angry gun owners will remember at the polls if he decides to seek office again, remain unclear. While the bill is far short of what President Obama wants to sign into law, if it passes, it will be used as the plateau from which the next series of demands will be issued.
I don’t know why Toomey felt compelled to take this stance. Why does any tyrant feel compelled to be one? Original sin due to the “federal headship” of Adam. If you don’t like that answer, you don’t hurt my feelings. Queue one up of your own. Either way, I hope Toomey chokes.
|
|
On April 10, 2013 at 1:34 pm, HempRopeAndStreetlight said:
Death to tyrants.
On April 10, 2013 at 2:08 pm, Bill said:
This is just sad to watch. Is it really too much to ask for a principled stand anymore?
“Bipartisan” Just another word for “They’re all guilty.”.
On April 10, 2013 at 6:58 pm, MarineOfficer said:
I prefer people like Toomey, because he does not scurry in the dark. He has told us openly where he stands, and now he can be escorted out of the halls of power and back into obscurity. Thanks for playing, your services are no longer required.
What continues to concern me is the regulatory structures he proposes. Our government loves nothing more than a good regulatory agency, allowing the federal leviathan to grow another tentacle. BATFE was on life support as of a couple of years ago, but will likely find new life with this type of legislation, and who knows what new agencies this will spawn.
On April 10, 2013 at 7:06 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Yes, you have a point. It’s better when people declare themselves to be rubes and stooges of the leviathan rather than have to guess.
On April 10, 2013 at 8:10 pm, PerhapsBUT said:
That only means something if they are given the appropriate punishment due traitors.
On April 10, 2013 at 8:16 pm, Herschel Smith said:
And if they are not punished? We’re as finished as I thought we were. Maybe all of this is in vain anyway.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
On April 10, 2013 at 9:24 pm, Josh said:
Yes, we are as finished as you thought. What will not be in vain is what comes next.
Live free or die.
On April 10, 2013 at 9:36 pm, bubba said:
Consequences, they’re not just for us.
On April 11, 2013 at 3:08 am, Doug said:
If they get to 2014 mid-terms I see the election advertising:
“Bloomie’s Boys”
[as endorsed by OBammy]
“Vote for MORE Tyranny!”
Of course they may not get past the coming Drumhead Courts-Martial …
On April 11, 2013 at 9:17 am, Chuck said:
The only slogan that matters for the 2014 mid-term elections is “A vote for tyranny is a vote for civil war…this is your last chance, bitches.”
On April 11, 2013 at 11:34 am, HempRopeAndStreetlight said:
No Chuck. It’s too late for voting. The Soap Box, Ballot Box, and the Jury Box have failed us. When this last intolerable act becomes law, it shall time for us to remedy this “government problem” in the manner prescribed by the great men who founded this nation.
May God forgive us all for what we will have to do. And what we will have to sacrifice. May those that pushed us hear taste ash in equal portions.
On April 11, 2013 at 8:37 pm, scott s. said:
I reviewed the Manchin/Toomey amendment aka Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013 (gotta love the cynical way they name these things). Basically it giveth and taketh away.
Gives:
Out of state gun dealer can now sell at gun show.
Out of state in-person transfer of any firearm (not just long guns) at dealer location (though will have to go back and study if that means you can buy at an out of state gun show from a dealer — of course this assumes a dealer is willing to sell to a non-resident)
Some protection for Vets from the VA classifying Vet as mentally incapacitated (and thus prohibited person)
Clarifies that transporting between states allow for overnight stops enroute
Does not require “gun show NICS” if state already has functionally equivalent process
Makes future provision for reducing the max allowed “delay” for “gun show NICS” to 24 hours (comment: still too long).
Some civil suit protections for FFLs/transferors for actions taken by transferees after following procedures.
Clarifies that active duty service member is a “resident” (for transfer purposes) of home of record, home of residence (while on orders), and state of PCS duty station (had this situation myself when I was domiciliary of New York, resident in Maryland, and stationed in Virginia)
Takes:
Requires NICS for any transfer at gun show or “pursuant” to any advertisement (publication or internet) of intent to sell or buy
No cap on fees FFL can charge for “gun show” NICS. (delay response will still effectively result in no transfer. ISTM that no transfer requires NICS for owner/transferor to retrieve firearm from FFL.)
Allows police “sting” operations for violations of “gun show NICS”