Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Checks and Balances

Manchin right on gun background checks

July 7, 2013

U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin’s detractors sometimes have accused him of being more interested in winning elections than doing the right thing, especially if that involves an unpleasant political fight....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(62)

denver

Jul-07-13 6:59 AM

Why bother? Its not like the House of Representatives is going to do anything about it anyway!

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jul-07-13 6:59 AM

Those who support the increased background checks cannot answer a very simple question. What is the point in creating new law when current law IS NOT being enforced?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 7:22 AM

That's like saying why have laws against speeding when sometimes they they don't enforce the speeding laws we have now!

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 7:24 AM

And what "current law IS NOT being enforced' and by whom? There little buddy.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 8:04 AM

"As for creating new law when current law isn't being enforced" did you ever think maybe Manchins bill addressed that? But then again, why bother its not like the republican controlled House of Representatives is going to do anything with it anyway, even if it could get by the republican filibuster in the Senate. And if it did get by the republican Senators and was brought to the floor in the House of Representatives they for sure would have a challenger in the premieres, backed by the NRA and the gun dealers that's for sure. Just look at Manchin, NRA member for life!

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

praterhugh

Jul-07-13 9:37 AM

What part of "shall not be infringed" does the writer not understand? Ben Franklin said, "Those who would give up essential freedoms for safety, deserve neither."

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jul-07-13 9:50 AM

I also do not understand why Senator Manchin does not exempt current legal concealed carry permit holders from background checks as they have already submitted to a federal check. Why is another needed? Another unanswered question.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RANDOM21

Jul-07-13 10:08 AM

Blood in the water always draws sharks. This time it's just a universal background check that is far from universal. Selling guns without the check will continue and the next new law will want to correct that, somehow. Then the next and the next and the next till the right to bear arms will be whittled down to what exists in other parts of the world. The law abiding populace will be unarmed and the criminals will still have theirs. Another of Holder's Fast and Furious rifles has been tied to the death of a Mexican Police Chief way south of the border in Central Mexico. Why not apply existing laws and put him up on charges? Executive Privilege.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 10:12 AM

Little buddy, I'd say it's because people and circumstances change over time , wouldn't you?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 10:52 AM

"Selling guns without the check will "continue" and the next new law will want to correct that, somehow. Then the next and the next and the next..." "RANDOM21" how is that going to unarmed law abiding people?? if their not enforcing the law then then their not enforcing the law. Right?

And I reckon if you sold a gun in the Bulletin Board, and somebody used it to kill somebody, then you should be brought up on charges of murder. Right??

You just have to wonder about some peoples way of thinking!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 11:07 AM

Lol.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RANDOM21

Jul-07-13 11:24 AM

"how is that going to unarmed law abiding people?? if their not enforcing the law then then their not enforcing the law. Right?" What does this even mean? I'm Random, but this is incoherent.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 11:33 AM

"This time it's just a universal background check that is far from universal. Selling guns without the "check will continue" and the next new law will want to correct that, somehow. Then the next and the next and the next till the right to bear arms will be whittled down to what exists in other parts of the world."

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 11:39 AM

In other words 'RANDOM21" if their not running the background checks, and the laws are not fixing it. Then how is that going to unarmed law abiding people??

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RANDOM21

Jul-07-13 11:40 AM

For the most part background checks are only completed on "law abiding citizens". The rate of prosecution on rejected applications is low (not applying existing law). If one sells a gun using the Bulletin Board and it crosses state lines, by law, the gun should pass through FFL holders with checks run. How many illegal purchases are made yearly by using the BB? This paper's own wants ads still allow guns to be listed. How many times are they party to a federal offense? BTW: None of mine are ever sold. I've got what I need and now only try to keep them fed. Same approach I use with children. The libs will not be satisfied with this new law. They will want more, more, and more restrictions. If sales to friends and family are still allowed, with seven degrees of separation you could sell a gun to Kevin Bacon.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RANDOM21

Jul-07-13 11:44 AM

"Then how is that going to unarmed law abiding people??" Read this s l o w l y and then explain what it means.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 11:56 AM

If their "law abiding citizens" then whats the problem?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 11:57 AM

'RANDOM21" if their not running the background checks, and the laws are not fixing it. Then how is that going to unarm law abiding people??

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 12:09 PM

"RANDOM21" This is what you wrote isn't it? " Selling guns without the check will continue and the next new law will want to correct that, somehow. Then the next and the next and the next till the right to bear arms will be whittled down to what exists in other parts of the world. The law abiding populace will be unarmed and the criminals will still have theirs." So again how is that going to unarm law abiding people??

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RANDOM21

Jul-07-13 12:42 PM

The next law will be to restrict what types of arms we will be allowed and how many rounds the magazines will hold. The charade of "assault weapons" causing mayhem will be superseded by handgun restrictions followed by who is mentally able to own a gun and when they (whoever they may be) deem one to be unfit they come and confiscate your firearms. Will law abiding citizens trust the medical providers not to turn them in if they seek counseling? Will untreated minor mental problems go untreated and manifest into something much more serious due to new laws? Good lord man, the government is compiling all information now, waiting for another new law so they can mine it for all it contains. Do you really trust them to be fair and who says what's fair. It's not paranoia if they are really out there doing it.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 12:48 PM

Now your making up stuff, but what else is new?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jul-07-13 12:49 PM

I ask a simple question. Instead of getting a simple answer all I see is idiotic comments trying to distort the facts. Out of 10,000 known background violations in 2011, 60 were prosecuted. Liberals aren't interest in enforcing the laws. If they were they wod demand those violations receive attention. They are only insteted in keeping the issue at the forefront through their continued ******** and crying. Hypocrites one and all!!!!!

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 12:51 PM

I know it's hard, but try to stay with the facts.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jul-07-13 12:55 PM

And I asked a simple question." what "current law IS NOT being enforced' and by whom?" And "Why bother? Its not like the House of Representatives is going to do anything about it anyway!"

OK two.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jul-07-13 2:23 PM

10,940 violations of current background check cilia toons and Manchin wants additional laws. Where is the logic?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 62 comments Show More Comments
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web