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.”

[Darren McCarty]

Gottlieb’s usually good, but I don’t get this at all. I read the amendment, and frankly, I think it sucks. It’s contradictory, and the good parts have so many loopholes you can drive a truck through it.

[Nextrush]

Toomey, Manchin and other politicians showed their true unconstitutional colors last week and now the spin is on since those of us out here in the grassroots aren’t buying their compost.

[Defiant]

I’m with you on that. We don’t deny felons or anyone else their First Amendment rights; why are they not allowed their God-given right to defend themselves? Especially if their felony had nothing to do with shooting people? In all other jurisprudence, laws have to be carefully crafted not to impair an important right, which is how we get porn protected by the Constitution somehow, and why abortions are available to 12 year olds.

[Billthedrill]

“We win rights back like crazy.”

Hogwash. Enumerate them or shut the hell up.

What has become clear in all of this is that certain political representatives have come to regard our most fundamental Constitutional rights as suddenly negotiable, proper subject matter for back-room dealing and alcohol-fueled horse trading on luxury yachts. That's disgusting enough when it involves political pork such as highway funding; here, however, we're in what a certain Texan friend of mind calls "hanging territory."

It is a mistaken assumption that nominally conservative members of the ruling class will act like anything other than members of the ruling class. This topic never even should have come up. I am not particularly grateful for these people bartering our rights and "winning", if in fact they have; I'm furious at them for bartering our rights in the first place.

[CottShop]

[[“we snookered the other side — they haven’t figured it out yet.”]]

Yep- mr brilliant ‘snookered’ them alright- ooops- there’s still time for the left to catch on ESPECIALLY after you spell it out to them- Doh!”

[Tzimisce]

Sounds like another liberal front group (which would be why I’ve never heard of this bunch).

I’m sorry - how does massive new oversight and regulation make things more free?

[CottShop]

[[“we snookered the other side — they haven’t figured it out yet.”]]

Yep by golly you wascally weabbits sure pulled the woool over hteir eyes- oh wait- no you didn’t- you gave them EVEN MORE LEGITIMACY and even more icnentive to push even harder the next go aroudn when they further violate our rights- Thanks a ton there buddy old pal-

[boxlunch]

So gun manufacturing and sales at that point would be controlled by international mafia/ drug cartels etc. Just lovely.

[CottShop]

[[All of these so-called law makers have imo failed to protect the innocent.]]

And IF we had any representatives in washington with even an iota of courage they woudl hold a press cdonference and tell the american peopel the TRUTH! That washington has 1000’s of gun laws already on the books but that they REFUSE to do what is neccesary to protect hte kids by putting trained armed guards in schools which is the ONLY thing that can detere3 maggots from entering these gun free zones and slaughterign our children

The republicans should be sayign to the american public that this bill is nothign more than the same innefective measures that we’ve had i nthe past, and infact will make everyoen LESS safe by violatign hteir constitutional right to self protection- the republicans hsoudl be making the case that this is NOT abotu protectign hte kids, but abotu confiscatign guns and makign us less safe while making our kids even htat much more vulnerable- the republicans hsoudl be portrayign htel eft as the party that hates kids for their unwillingness to adequately protect them with EFFECTIVE measures liek mandatory metal detectors and screening centers for backpacks, bookbags etc AND by placign traiend armed guards on premise so that the cowards who previously targetted innocent unprotected kids iwl lthink twice before doign that again

[onyx]

I always marvel in complete disgust at the ease libtards manage to convince a so-called conservative to their side, but the reverse never happens.

[CottShop]

[[Seems pretty unambiguous to me in my state.

The Constitution of the State of Michigan of 1963 Article 1, Section 6 reads, “Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.”]]

Devil’s advocate “Well I don’t know your honor, it sounds to me liek they were talking abotu a board game and NOT about actually protectign yourself physically, itl ooks liek that was the original intent of the amendment- perhaps they were talkign about hte game monopoly where you defend your section of the board- or perhaps another game where you have to defend yourself- oh wait- I’ve got it your honor, they were talkign abotu hte onlien game Day of Defeat where peopel have to defend their city agaiosnt invadign armies-

So you see your honor, nothign really means what it looks lke it means qand since there can be any number of interpretations we simply can’t rule based on olny one itner[pretation by gun lovign nuts on the right”

[onyx]

I can’t remember the last time a law or a regulation was repealed or rescinded, can you?

[CottShop]

[[Someone please tell me the current “problems” this bill solves in a way that benefits gun owners.]]

It removes guns from them so that they don’t ever have the burden of worry abotu self protection again as they can simply call 911 and wait for hte police to show up- and women who are beign raped cvan simply urinate o ntheir attacker isntead of shootign the perp’s worthless carcass thus ridding hte world of one more waste of oxygen- and the raped woman can then have a baby she never planned on and she will get the thrill of watign on aids test which can take weeks or months in some cases results to see if she got infected or not-

Old folks can have the rush of excitement one gets when one’s home has been burgularized- and they can get a rush wodnerign if the perp has a fulyl auto gun (which are BANNED for law abiders of course) and htey get to play a guessign game whiel they cower i na closet hoping their neighbor will spot somethign suspicious and call gthe police for them since they are trapepd and can’t get to a phone

Little kids will get to wonder why there are4 no armed guards protectign htem in such a vulnerable gun free zone, and wonder why our leadership refuses to provide even the msot common sense approach to protectiosn i nthe schools

So you see, there’s all kidns of benifits to confiscating guns from law abiding citizens

[Nextrush]

Must be a lot of phony conservatives in the GOP....

But my mantra lately is that over 90 percent of the people we elect as Republicans are phony.

They talk like conservatives but they are not willing to take conservative actions like quickly balancing the budget.

They have no principles only calculations as to how they can win the next election and their calculations are almost always in a leftwards direction.

[CottShop]

[[the “if we can save just one life by trashing the constitution” gambit, etc.]]

Yup- but htey IGNORE THE FACT that lives are saved every singel day THANKS TO GUNS in the home or on the person when they are attacked by gun wielding criminals

Then the “the “if we can save just one life” mantra goes right out the window- savign lives by ALLOWING guns doesn’t count- it ONLY coutns when a life or two or perhaps even a few dozen are THOUGHT to be saved by confiscating guns

The sad part though is that apaprently a majority of peopel have been brainwashed by this administration into believign that confiscation is a good thing

[LRoggy]

From the article’s comments section:

“Citizens can buy and own the same weapons as any branch of state or federal Law enforcement carry”

I’m not sure I want my neighbor buying a SAM missile . . .

[mrsmel]

No I can’t, and there was nothing ambiguous about the Second Amendment as it was written-the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That is as plain as a statement can be.

[sickoflibs]

From link :”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” and went on to list a host of gun-rights protections in the measure, such as allowing interstate handgun sales for dealers and protections for veterans, for example.
“It’s a Christmas tree,” Mr. Gottlieb said. “We just hung a million ornaments on it.”
“We’re taking the background check and making it a pro-gun bill,” he added. “Unfortunately, some of my colleagues haven’t quite figured it out yet because they weren’t sitting in the room writing it,” he continued. “My staff was. I’ll be perfectly candid about it. This will probably break on Monday in the Wall Street Journal.”
“If you really read what’s in the Manchin-Toomey bill — man, it’s a godsend,” he went on to say. “We win rights back like crazy.”
“I think we snookered the other side,” he said. “They haven’t figured it out yet.”

Interesting development Pd.
When (+if) gun control libs start bailing from this bill in significant #s then we will know the Senate Dems have stepped right into the quick-sand. Then Obama will have his first post election disaster, much like Bush Harriot Myers eight years ago.

[CottShop]

[[This theory is premised on the idea that if they can take guns away from everybody, even the black market will dry up, and gun violence will go away.]]

Well that’s not quite right- they believe that if they can take guns away from law abidign citizens then this means there will be less access by bad guys to guns and hteir mantra of ‘if it can save just one life’ coems into [play here- see- their bills and laws are all based on not havign to prove a negative- you can’t prove for isntance that “Well, because there wasn’t a gun in the house, a criminal couldn’t steal it and htus a future crime has been averted” - it’s just like dear leader when he was claiming how many jobs were ‘saved’ because of his stimulus package- they were including, and continue to include thigns that can NOT be proved to support their ideology-

The ONLY effective coutner argument to these creep’s arguments is IF the republicans miraculously find hteir spines and start bringign testimony after testimony of folsk before congress who were SAVED by ownign and using guns to protect themselves and their families and by tellign congress, and indee the US that had they NOT been allowed to own guns, these good folks woudl NOT be alive today and then ask congress to look these poepel i nthe face and tell them that their lives are not worth saving and tellign htem that they have no right to legally own a gun

But htat isn’t goign to happen- the republicans have capitulated to the left ONCE AGAIN and are abotu to give oru govenremtn cart blanc power to confiscate oru guns for ANY reaso nthey like- Hell, a war eteran was just arrested or ‘displaying his guin in a mennacing manner’ whiel walkign down hte road with hisw grandchild after hunting and carrying hte gun military style apaprently

[CottShop]

[[“We win rights back like crazy.”
Hogwash. Enumerate them or shut the hell up.

What has become clear in all of this is that certain political representatives have come to regard our most fundamental Constitutional rights as suddenly negotiable, proper subject matter for back-room dealing and alcohol-fueled horse trading on luxury yachts. That’s disgusting enough when it involves political pork such as highway funding; here, however, we’re in what a certain Texan friend of mind calls “hanging territory.”

It is a mistaken assumption that nominally conservative members of the ruling class will act like anything other than members of the ruling class. This topic never even should have come up. I am not particularly grateful for these people bartering our rights and “winning”, if in fact they have; I’m furious at them for bartering our rights in the first place.]]

Very well put and spot on- there is NO way in hell thsi shoudl have ever been broguht to a vote- I said it a few daysd ago- the republicans shoudl have REFUSED to go to the vote and isntead held a press conference tellign hte american peopel that hte left was in session as they spoke tryign to vioalte the people’s secodn amendment rights and that there was no way in hell the republicans were goign to be a party to such a violation of the secodn amednment

The repuiblicans lost a perfect opportunity to win back the Americans they lost by their spinelessness throughout hte years- but once again- they proved just how worthless they are as our representatives in washington and have proved how little they truly care abotu our constitutional rights

Every last republican that voted to proceed with the vote shoudl be ashamed of themselves and owe the Aemrican public an apology for wastign oru tax dollars supportign them