Skip to comments.NRA Fires Back: Gun rights group to oppose Manchin, Toomey background check bill
Posted on 04/10/2013 10:36:37 AM PDT by xzins
The National Rifle Association will oppose the background check bill introduced by Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) and Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) Wednesday, the pro-Second Amendment group told the Free Beacon.
Manchin and Toomey held a press conference Wednesday morning announcing a bipartisan bill that would expand background checks for all commercial firearm sales, including gun shows and Internet sales.
The bill is the latest effort by the Senate to introduce background check legislation, after negotiations between Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) and Democrats broke down earlier this year.
Manchins office told BuzzFeed Wednesday that the senators had been talking with the NRA, but the Second Amendment group had thus far remained neutral.
The NRA has not said either way, Katie Longo, Manchins press secretary, told BuzzFeed. The senators have been talking to the NRA, but theyre still neutral.
A spokesman for the NRA said the report was wrong.
The NRA reiterated its opposition to expanded background checks in a statement to the Washington Free Beacon.
Expanding background checks at gun shows will not prevent the next shooting, will not solve violent crime and will not keep our kids safe in schools, the NRA said. While the overwhelming rejection of President Obama and Mayor Bloombergs universal background check agenda is a positive development, we have a broken mental health system that is not going to be fixed with more background checks at gun shows.
The sad truth is that no background check would have prevented the tragedy in Newtown, Aurora or Tucson, the NRAs statement continued. We need a serious and meaningful solution that addresses crime in cities like Chicago, addresses mental health deficiencies, while at the same time protecting the rights of those of us who are not a danger to anyone. President Obama should be as committed to dealing with the gang problem that is tormenting honest people in his hometown as he is to blaming law-abiding gun owners for the acts of psychopathic murderers.
MEMO to the NRA: In the past, you’ve ignorantly supported “pro gun” Democrats (as if such a thing were possible) like Reid and Manchin. So, are you ready to admit that this was a stoooopid flaccid attempt at faux bipartisanship now?
So the NRA is going to oppose the bill, huh?
Are they also going to oppose Manchin and Toomey (and Reid, among others they’ve given money to) from here on out?
The NRA’s support 2 cycles ago of Harry Reid was insane, and we all knew it was insane.
That doesn’t mean, however, that they can’t acquire big boy pants and finally figure out what’s going on.
They are right about this.
No amount of background checks will keep creeps, demons, and ne’er-do-wells from injuring lives with various kinds of weapon.
Witness the knifings yesterday.
News flash: King Obama’s communists empire is action, NRA is talk and hope. Getting real pissed that the only group winning is the communists Democrats.
Let’s hope they’ve learned their lesson. Despite that recent history, they still are right about this legislation and this compromise.
And for those of us conservatives who fought for Toomey, one who was so “staunchly conservative”, we again have our eyes opened about a GOP politician.
Got any comments on that?
Pat Toomey rode the TEA party coattail to come up with this legislation with Manchin (D-WV). That’s the real crime.
The NRA is about action.
I think they’re regaining their edge.
They have done a stellar job in the battle for gun rights since the Sandy Hook incident became a means of manipulation by the socialists.
1) Where, in the Constitution, is the Congress authorized to require a background check prior to purchasing a firearm?
2) Where, in the Constitution, is the Congress authorized to keep records of who has purchased what firearms and when the purchases occurred?
3) Leftists keeping records of firearm purchases inevitable leads to leftists attempting to steal those firearms.
4) What part of "shall not be infringed" is difficult to understand?
“The NRAs support 2 cycles ago of Harry Reid was insane, and we all knew it was insane.”
Quid pro quo for a multimillion dollar shooting range on Federal land.
So, you aren’t arguing that pointless legislation is something we should just allow.
Therefore, it’s the matter of danger that you’re failing to see.
Checks require submitting names.
Submitted names can be compiled into a list.
The US Government wants a list of every gun owner in the nation.
Because it opens the door to gun registration is why...
What a COWARD.
Why doesn’t Speaker Bohener nip this in the bud and say that any gun control bill is DOA in the House, like Reid has done numerous time with budget bills ?
“Got any comments on that?”
Like they say in the investments business, “Past performance does not guarantee future performance.”
The NRA’s ratings are given based on how legislators voted in the past. Manchin has a good history on gun rights, thus the A ratings. I fully expect his future rating to suffer from this.
It does appear the socialist always use “felons” as a fall back push for more gun control because most gullible Americans will always support keeping firearms out of the hands of so called “felons” when in fact, the socialist are pushing legislation to prevent ownership, possession, and collection and eventual confiscation all firearms from “law abiding” Americans!!!!
Wake up America, they are coming for YOUR firearms, the use of “felons” has NOTHING to do with the latest gun control push and “Universal firearm Registry and Background checks” since “felons” cannot possess a firearm under current federal law!
Manchin has a good history on gun rights
No, he did not. Manchin had a nearly null history on gun rights; the issue doesn't come up much in WEST Virginia. The NRA chose to spin that as a 'good record', for whatever weird reasons, despite warnings from real WEST Virginians in WEST Virginia that the SOB Manchin was not to be trusted.
See? I TOLD YOU SO!!!
“but I am not clear on what makes these background checks dangerous.”
Suppose you once had a prescription for an antidepressant, mood elevator, or something like ambien. With Obamacare, the records are all shared. Since you may be dangerous (why else take those drugs?) you could be denied RKBA.
Let’s say we allow this to pass and find that five yeears from now it’s commonsense and reasonable to deny RKBA to repeat traffic offenders or those who missed a loan payment. No law gets looser with age.
In NY there is a dad who lost his license and guns “until his son turns 18 and moves out” because the kid said something threatening. So with a really good background check system, you could be denied RKBA for some condition or status someone in your house (or neighborhood) has.
Besides, what gives government the right to do this? The Constitution is a document whose major purpose is to restrict what governments can do, and it’s time to recover some of the ground lost.
You would think Manchin and Toomey would have ASKED for the NRA’s input...
If the NRA restricted their endorsements to one party, their support would be worthless.
If that happened, gun owners would be in the same position as Blacks - one party takes you for granted and the other knows you are a lost cause.
Why? Munchkin the Hack already has the endorsement and the "A" rating, and he isn't up for reelection until 2018. He's home free, and can let his inner leftist petty tyrant run wild.
If the NRA restricted their endorsements to PROVEN pro-gun LEADERS (which Munchkin is not and never was) they wouldn't look like a bunch of feckless asshats.
The proposed background checks is nothing more than another step towards national control of every firearm in the United States. the socialist will sweeten the pot until they get enough RINO’s to support the proposed legislation and once it is adopted, then the real laws will be written to further restrict the use, possession and sale of firearms in the Country!
Keep in mind, there is nothing [dangerous] about a background check, it is what the government intends to do with the information they are collecting from these background checks that will ultimately be the danger to firearm ownership by law abiding Americans! Confiscation by attrition.
Definitely Toomey, a supposed conservative republican.
Manchin always has been a chameleon and always will be. I live close enough to WVa to know that a democrat is still a democrat, even in WVa. So, every 4 years, they have to become “conservatives”.
And we let them get away with it.
This puts the government smack in the middle of one of your God-given, self evident, inalienable rights. It’s as bad as them deciding if you qualify to go to a particular church.
Not to mention your name, address, phone number ... and your social security number if you expect to get an answer within 30 minutes.
If a felon is no danger, hence being let out of prison, he/she should be allowed to own a fire arm. If they are a danger, they should be in jail. No law will stop them from having a firearm. I know you know all this. I just wanted to add it.
From the NRA-PVF:
“While serving in the United States Senate, Joe Manchin signed a bipartisan letter opposing any international treaty by the United Nations or any other global organization that would impose restrictions on American gun owners. Manchin also cosponsored S. 2188, The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, which would have ensured that law-abiding Americans with a valid concealed handgun permit would have been able to carry a concealed handgun in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry. In addition, Manchin cosponsored S. 570, a bill that would prevent the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from circumventing the will of Congress by centralizing records of thousands of Americans long gun purchases.
As Governor of West Virginia, Manchin signed state Castle Doctrine legislation to restore the right to self-defense in a persons home and property. He also signed state legislation to increase reciprocity for West Virginia Right-to-Carry permit holders.”
He may not have a long record, but none of these, FROM THE PAST, sound bad.
I always understood that once an American has served their time, paid their debt to society, they cannot be denied their basic Constitutional protections. Evidently, the socialist believe that no matter how long ago you served your time, your debt has not been paid, and with every new law, you must be forced to pay your debt to society again, again, and again. So long as the socialist keep moving their agenda forward with the support of Americans!
Liars. They knew damned well this would never fly with the NRA.
Don’t get me wrong, I generally support the NRA - and I don’t expect any person or any group to be perfect (I know, that makes me an UNFreeper) - but I do reserve the right to criticize when they are not being smart, and by supporting Democrats - which they do simply to try and prove something to the idiots in the media - they are screwing up.
What part of this do they not understand:
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
No, it's the Senate's mess for now...let them take the heat.
As soon as Boehner steps in the spotlight goes from Reid to Boehner. Boehner had enough spotlight in the last 4 years with Reid NEVER getting any attention.
Time for the Senate to take some pressure and DON'T diffuse it!
NRA should back a primary challenger to Toomey.
That would get his attention.
“I always understood that once an American has served their time, paid their debt to society, they cannot be denied their basic Constitutional protections.”
There are some states where this is automatic, and some states that require the felon to go through a judge and a process by which their rights are restored. And some states say “never” when it comes to firearms.
The NRA gave equal support to the Democrat who was running against Coburn in OK. We stopped giving them any money afeter that and have since joined Gun Owners of America.
Guess what, Sparky? I already knew that. I LIVE here. I read NRA's disgusting, over the top, breathless endorsement in my copy of American Rifleman.
I voted against Rat Bastard Manchin anyway.
Maybe NRA should pay some attention to folks who live in the states where these smarmy bastards come from, instead of sitting in their NoVA Ivory Tower deciding what looks good on paper.
That might be nice, but unfortunately, the paper record is all they have to go on, as limited as it is. The record is fact. Opinions vary.
Although I have my issue with the NRA (I’m a member), it has a top-notch PR team that really knows how to frame the debate. If only our so-called Republican leadership had the will and stomach to do the same. The debate should not be about gun control;, but about violence that from a statistical standoint is epidemic in certain segments of our population.
Seriously ... a national organization like NRA should not put its credibility on the line without good reason. There's absolutely no reason for them to issue an endorsement in every or any particular election. There are lots of good reasons for them NOT to do so ... biggest one is that a poorly placed endorsement, like Manchin (for example) makes them look like complete idiots when it (predictably) blows up in their faces.
Don't try to defend the indefensible. Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
NRA should be ashamed of itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.