Manchin; gun control is tough

| December 23, 2013 | 8 Comments

My Senator, Joe Manchin was on CNN yesterday telling the echo chamber that gun control legislation in 2014 is going to be tough, but he’s going to take another shot at it anyway according to a Politico link sent to us by UpNorth;

Manchin, a gun owner who had a top rating from the National Rifle Association, negotiated a background check bill with Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting in Connecticut. But the measure stalled in the Senate in April when it failed to get the needed 60 votes to advance.

Manchin said gun owners didn’t oppose background checks in theory but were concerned that government wouldn’t stop with checks.

“What we found out is that people couldn’t trust government that they would stop there,” he said.

Manchin needs to listen to his constituency – no one in West Virginia trusts government to do anything,especially when it comes to gun control. As I’ve said repeatedly, there are enough gun laws in place to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but prosecutors are not using those laws. My own experience with prosecutors lately is that they don’t want to do anything that takes them away from their Facebook pages for more than a couple of minutes so they can keep up with the latest cat videos. Well, as near as I can figure.

We look at how screwed up the healthcare regs have been for people, especially, the people who have been acting responsibly and paying for their health insurance all of their adult lives, do we really think that new gun control laws won’t do the same to legal gun owners? The Congress didn’t think about the impact their new heathcare laws would have on folks out here minding their own business, they aren’t considering their impact on gun owners, either.

Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Comments (8)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. UpNorth says:

    Well, he was on CNN, so it’s not like a lot of people saw/heard him.
    I wonder, do they need to beat the 60 vote threshold, now that Dirty, Dingy Harry Reid changed the rules in the Senate?

  2. Eagle Keeper says:

    NEVER believe them.

    Jon Kyl was our congressman (Phoenix) in the early ’90s. In the run-up to the Klintoon Krime Bill of 1994, I would write to him urging him to vote against this anti-gun provision and oppose that anti-gun parliamentary maneuver. I always get a letter back saying that he would NEVER — no NEVER — vote to infringe my right to keep and bear arms.

    Bastard voted for KKB 94 anyways.

    When I howled in protest (with both phone calls and letters), he sent me a four-page, single-spaced letter of explanations and justifications — the primary one being that KKB 94 included the “Violence Against Women Act,” which he had been co-sponsoring with some Democrat congresswench for 2 or 3 terms now, and he simply couldn’t vote against that by voting against KKB 94. But he vowed that he would “fight to repeal the anti-gun provisions of KKB 94.”

    And of course, for the next ten years, Kyl never lifted a finger to do so. Never introduced a repeal bill, and never co-sponsored anyone else’s anti-KKB 94 provisions.

    Oh, and the Supreme Court later struck down parts of the “Violence Against Women” act. Said violence against women wasn’t in federal jurisdiction.

    Which is what I wrote Kyl after reading his four pages of sniveling excuses. “Your ‘VAW’ act ain’t constitutional anyhow. But even if it was, how would that excuse attacking the Bill of Rights?”

    Kyl was also running for Senate that year, and ironically (or not), even though the NRA downgraded him for voting for KKB 94, they supported him against his A+ rated Libertarian challenger. Which led many of us to conclude that the R in “NRA” actually stood for “Republican.”

    Feh. A pox on ALL their houses.

  3. ohio says:

    Despite attempts to persuade people otherwise, Manchin is dyed in the wool liberal and bows to his democrat bosses. He would boil children for dinner if harry told him to.

  4. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    What we found out is that people couldn’t trust government

    No sh1t Manchin, glad you finally caught up you stupid son of a b1tch….

  5. NHSparky says:

    It’s amazing what our so-called “elected representation” actually says and thinks about us when they think nobody’s watching.

  6. gitarcarver says:

    On the back of my social security card there is a notice saying “under penalty of law,” the only time the number can be used is for the purpose of identification with the Social Security Administration.

    Can I now get a license without giving a Social Security number? Can I open a bank account without a social security number? Can I do business with some companies without a Social Security number?


    What reason do I have for trusting the government on something like the privacy of gun background checks when they have already demonstrated the willingness to change laws with respect to privacy and agreements with citizens?

    Personally, I am for background checks when it comes to sales of weapons. I can’t think of a worse feeling know that I, or someone else, may have sold a weapon to someone who was prohibited by law (mental issues, felon, etc) and the weapon was used in a crime or to harm someone.

    For me, I want the peace of mind that a background check would bring (even on the 4% of “illegal” sales at gun shows.) Yet I cannot escape the dreaded feeling or knowledge that a background check leads to gun registration because the data doesn’t seem to go away. Even if a law were written to destroy the data immediately, that doesn’t mean the law won’t be changed later. With gun registration comes the chance of confiscation.

    Politicians talk of the lack of trust with the government all the time. What they don’t realize or aren’t willing to address is that they are the reason for that lack of trust. They are the ones that break promises. They are the ones that lie to us peon-esque citizens.

    Once trust is lost, it must be re-earned and I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

  7. Flagwaver says:

    Hey, Jonn. It is unfair to compare something like evil black scary guns to health care. I was being screwed by paying $177 less for a plan that provided me $800 less co-pay and didn’t even provide me maternity coverage! I’ve been a guy all my life, but you never know when maternity coverage may be needed!

  8. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    Manchinski has written his pink slip. The one to worry about is that RINO Capito. She wants to be a senator. What she need is to be sent home.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *