This week, I worked with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on legislation that would have made it harder for criminals and the dangerously mentally ill to obtain guns while preserving the rights of law-abiding people to do so. The bill did not move forward in the Senate.
This amendment would have helped enhance public safety while still protecting the Second Amendment. I understand the passions on both sides of this issue. I did what I thought was the right thing for our country. I sought out a compromise position that I thought could move the ball forward on an important matter of public safety.
My only regret is that our amendment did not pass. It's not the outcome I hoped for, but the Senate has spoken on the subject, and it's time to move on. We have a lot of other very important issues to deal with such as getting the economy back on track, dealing with the debt ceiling and creating more jobs for Pennsylvanians.
Your shot at the Constitution was noticed, Toomey,
Well, I assume "forward" is defined as the direction towards more freedom, so what the heck is wrong with the status quo, followed by repeal of any of the existing laws found to be inequitable or obsolete? Why is it taken as a given that rights-theft by the government is "forward"?