Gun-rights leader: ‘We snookered the other side’ on Toomey-Manchin

The Washington Times ^

[Perdogg]

prominent gun-rights advocate claims his group’s staff was in the room during the drafting of the recently unveiled proposal to expand gun-purchase background checks and said that “we snookered the other side — they haven’t figured it out yet.”

[Perdogg]

ping

[cripplecreek]

No they didn’t. At best they put a little hot sauce in the Vaseline.

[Mr. K]

Oh and jes’ don’ throw is in dat ol’ briar patch too, that would be jes’ awful...!

[onyx]

Alan Gottlieb, too clever by half.

[basil]

Ping!

[Vendome]

Ha e no idea what that idiotic popup was on their website.

Note to self:

Don’t go to WA Times again

[libstripper]

Not necessarily. By bragging about this now he gives Upchuck and the the other communists reasons to vote agaisnt T-M. Then, with T-M dead, where to the communists go? This all looks like the beginning of a very complex game of three dimensional chess.

[cripplecreek]

I’ll support it as soon as someone shows me that background checks and restrictions have ANY impact on crime.

Until then the whole herd of cowards on both sides can kiss my calloused conservative ass.

[MrB]

The left doesn’t care what the conservatives do on each bill,

as long as another step towards confiscation is made.

[PowderMonkey]

"Mr. Gottlieb said that despite claims to the contrary, the amendment that would expand checks to sales online and at gun shows is “not registration”

A distinction without a difference. BATF computer transaction records remain in cyberspace decades after the gun purchase is cleared, just waiting for the data mining necessary to commence confiscation. The law abiding citizen is punished, and, through administrative "fees" must pay for the means by which this punishment is delivered. The criminal continues to obtain and retain his weapons, unfettered by "the law." Somebody tell me again, why is this comprise a "victory" for gun owners?

[Timber Rattler]

Not buying it.

[Georgia Girl 2]

I guess I haven’t figured it out yet either.

[V_TWIN]

“hot sauce in the Vaseline”

OUCH

[onyx]

NO on everything.

It’s that simple.

Shall NOT infringe.

[Tupelo]

Just a different set in the Washington DC Kabuki Theater.
Or maybe just a different skit in the Burlesque that is Washington DC. Strippers are next, then we get the final blackout. At that time we will know what they know now.

[onyx]

I’ll support nothing that comes out that snake pit.

[novemberslady]

Rush Limbaugh was right last week when said that we don't need more laws. He pointed out that the murderer of all those children broke the laws-many of them.

Rush was correct.

All of these so-called law makers have imo failed to protect the innocent.
Imo they need to realize that they have enabled mass murderers by restricting legitimate gun owners ability to protect themselves, and share the blame for things like this when they happen.

Of course none of them have the balls to stand up and say so.
Instead they run their little dog and pony shows, and work to create even more laws that will further help another mass murderer.

Shame on all of them that allowing this happen. They're a bigger disappointment than they realize.

[Nervous Tick]

>> This all looks like the beginning of a very complex game of three dimensional chess.

As I recall, the last game of “complex, three-dimensional chess” was played over the debt continuation, budget cuts, the “sequester”, etc.

As I recall, McConnell was held up as this genius who would not only end up extracting major deficit cuts from the ‘Rats, but would back them into a political corner, resulting in the election of a Republican to POTUS in 2012.

I really wish the (R)s would drop this three dimensional chess nonsense and go back to the less sexy option of TNEACIOUSLY REPRESENTING THE SIMPLE IDEALS OF THOSE WHO ELECTED THEM.

Because the reality is, the Stupid Party SUCKS at three dimensional chess — even though they THINK they are good at it.

[MrB]

“shall not” has very specific legal meaning,
and has had this specific meaning since before the Constitution