Manchin: Gun Bill To Be Reintroduced

Manchin: Gun Bill To Be Reintroduced

Associated Press – 2 hrs 15 mins ago
Excepts:

WASHINGTON (AP) – “One of the architects of failed gun control legislation says he's bringing it back.

Sen. Joe Manchin on Sunday said he would re-introduce a measure that would require criminal and mental health background checks for gun buyers at shows and online. The West Virginia Democrat says that if lawmakers read the bill, they will support it.
Manchin sponsored a previous version of the measure with Republican Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. It failed.

Manchin says there was confusion over what was in the bill.
In the wake of last year's school shooting in Newtown, Conn., Congress took up gun control legislation, but it was blocked by supporters of the powerful pro-gun lobby, the National Rifle Association.”

http://news.yahoo.com/manchin-gun-bill-reintroduced-170200855.html
.......

Well, what amount of watering down can Manchin do that he hasn’t previously done on the bill? He knows what the majority of Americans want in the bill and which we will get round by round.

Any thoughtful American could write out a better bill than what we will get, and I wish Reid will keep pulling it off the table until Congress gets it right. It will involve a lot of items that the NRA will find very painful, but that should be of no consequence to the legislators in Congress.

Until Congress can stand up and be counted by voice their true feelings on this bill, it will go round in circles until it reaches the table of the NRA which in turn will need to choose between justice for non gun owners, or continuing carnage of little school children.

There is nothing difficult in passing a law that safeguards the lives of children and innocent Americans, so what is holding Congress up in affirming the sanctity of life after being born, as they do with the sanctity of a six week old fetus?

 

Like I said ... Gun Control is on the table for all time ... well, it will be for as long as it takes to identify conservatives who want the mentally-ill and criminals to have the same 2nd Amendment Rights as you do ... especially going into every election.

 

The upcoming elections should get interesting with this assault on the Constitution. I predict the further progressive religion pushes you will see States become divided and the citizens migrate to the States that most represent them.

I am thankful that my grandchildren are in the Head Start program.

 

Care to prove that, or just be a scared little girl all the time.

 

Since there are more jobs, higher incomes and less guns in the blue states, I wonder where they'll migrate to?

Consider yourself reported.

 

OK, Iam reported. To whom may I ask?

 

Time will tell which States respect the Constitution and citizen and which State demand subjects. I have no crystal ball, do you?

 

can you point out what in the Manchin bill is unconstitutional?

 

infringed........

 

So do you have a better idea when it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of at least some of the mentally ill that are a danger to themselves and others?
I was against the proposed ban on "assault rifles" or high capacity clips but it is just common sense that we should at least try and keep guns out of the hands of those that have been deemed to be a danger, once deemed that they are once again balanced they can get their rights to gun ownership back. I know it will not weed them all out but some is better than nothing. If you are not one of those that this applies to them why the concern, resonsible gun ownership and sales is simple logic.

 

Great, another defeat for the One looms....

 

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand.

 

For one, it is dictating law for in State transfer which is not Federal territory. The current law on background checks is related to interstate commerce.

 

Progressives are more concerned about making harder for law abiding citizens to exercise their rights then they do about criminals getting guns. Why not make GANGS illegal? That will save more children's lives than anything else they are doing.

 

It has been "infringed" many times. All Amendments have been "infringed" through regulation. On a federal level, the Second Amendment was infringed in 1934, 1968, 1994, and will be infringed again. On a State and municipal level, it has been infringed even more. Denver has its own assault weapons ban, for example. It has been in place for 24 years.

Public safety from gun violence is far more important than an individual's right to pretend to need a gun.

 

WHAT?

Unemployment Rates for States
Monthly Rankings
Seasonally Adjusted
Mar. 2013p

Rank......State...........Rate
1...NORTH DAKOTA...3.3
2...NEBRASKA..........3.8
3...VERMONT............4.1
4...SOUTH DAKOTA...4.3
5...IOWA...................4.9
5...UTAH...................4.9
5...WYOMING...........4.9
8...OKLAHOMA.........5.0
9...HAWAII................5.1
10...VIRGINIA............5.3


42...MICHIGAN.........8.5
44...INDIANA............8.7
45...NEW JERSEY.....9.0
46...RHODE ISLAND......9.1
47...NORTH CAROLINA...9.2
48...CALIFORNIA............9.4
48...MISSISSIPPI............9.4
50...ILLINOIS..................9.5
51...NEVADA..................9.7

Souces
http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/access/id/346318/description/_

States with the most restrictive gun laws

#1 California
#2 New Jersey
#3 Massachusetts
#4 New York
#5 Connecticut
#6 Hawaii
#7 Maryland
#8 Rhode Island
#9 Illinois
#10 Pennsylvania

source http://www.deseretnews.com/top/1428/10/California-10-states-with-the-strictest-gun-laws.html

As you can see only one blue state with the most restrictive gun laws are in the top ten with the lowest unemployment. Can you source your information?

 

How about the Constitutional way of changing the BOR? Many silly laws have been passed, each state has laws that differ and driving through such State can mark you as a criminal. Nothing is consistent.

I am not for mentally ill to have firearms and in the same breath I am not for Government determining the threshold for being competent. Government has a proven record of being incompetent itself.

This tied with the extreme progressive religion of being anti 2A is a petri dish for abuse and the law abiding citizen will have to burden the fanatic wisdom.

So, at this point I am of the belief not to give one inch.

 

Passing laws that will not dent gun violence or even address the real issues is stupid and self defeating. You would think our legislators would use some intelligence instead of childishly passing laws because the "intent" is good.

 

Nothing trumps the BoR. We let it happen, mistakenly in the name of safety.
Yet we are not safer. And restricting our gun right further, isnt going to make it so.

 

The economy is still hovering 6 inches above the bottom of the bowl, one would think the Democrats would spend their time addressing the number #1 issue with 41% jobs and the economy, not guns with a whole 3% considering it their #1 issue. It will destroy them in 2014.

http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm

 

And therein lies the problem, some want no controls on gun ownership at either state or federal levels, others want all guns outlawed and taken away from everyone, neither side is correct or acting logically. There has to be a rational and fair way to identify the mentally ill that are really a danger and restricting their ownership rights for at least the time it takes to improve to a point they are no longer a danger. Maybe the better use of our time would be to come up with logical ideas that all rational minds can agree with and try to at least keep guns out of the hands of some of those that should not have access to them.

 

They are doing everything they can to keep the crappy economy out of the media sound bites. Expect more social policy crap for three and a half more years.

I'm seeing plenty of newly closed businesses and vacant commercial real estate in my neck of the woods. So, I say "what recovery!?!"

And, what ever happened to Obama's campaign promise to solve the Chinese trade deficit after Romney said that he would deal with China?

[video=youtube;viBMwQJi05A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viBMwQJi05A[/video]


[video=youtube;iAxdXEigi9Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAxdXEigi9Y[/video]

Put on your hip waders.

 

I think we have rational controls as is.
Mentally ill? Who is to say, who is doing the reporting, what illnesses are going to be included, what about peoples private medical records?
Perscriptions?
We have background checks when you buy a gun from a licenced dealer.
We have waiting periods of varying lenghts of time.
There is not "gun show loophole" like they are trying to say. Its bogus.
Private individuals can buy and sell private property to each other.
Answer some of those, and maybe we can talk. But remember in this country your medical records are private, period.

 

Need?? it is NOT the Bill of Needs it is the Bill Of Rights , people do not need Harleys' , television, internet , free phones , when 2 faced politicians turn in everything they DO NOT NEED then I will believe they are sincere until then obey the Constitution and quit telling me what I need for Christ's sake!!

 

Agreed but will never happen as you have stated below. Identifying the mentally ill will only capture a certain percentage. More shootings will happen by the insane and sane alike. Then when this law is realized not to be effective, as government has proven many times before it will want more restrictions.

How many laws will be acceptable? Government never takes only one drink from the well. I have no solution to keep everyone safe and neither does government. I believe the goal is complete banishment, slowly over time.