Second Amendment Foundation backs Manchin-Toomey Amendment

[EllisW]

I just got back from the post office after boxing up and returning all the membership items they sent me (plaque, belt buckle, etc) along with a hand written note telling them to remove my life membership from their records and explaining my objection to their actions. So much for the SAF being the last true friend we have in the fight to keep our rights.

[rugersol]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/15/gun-bill-backers-try-to-ease-registry-concerns-as-senate-debate-begins/

"It has been said on the floor recently that background check legislation cannot lead to gun registries because federal law prohibits that. But current federal law can be changed," Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said last week, calling recordkeeping a "step toward registration."

Those concerns were echoed Monday by Blunt, who said he plans to oppose the bill. He cited reports last week that said 185,000 people in his state were affected after a list of concealed-weapon permit holders was given to federal officials.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., also said in a statement last week that the Manchin-Toomey proposal "prioritizes collecting records over protecting citizens."

David Addington, with the conservative Heritage Foundation, argued that while the new proposal prohibits a federal registry, it also includes language that could create wiggle room for the Justice Department.

But over the weekend, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he was "very favorably disposed" to the Manchin-Toomey amendment.

... that should be yer 1st clue!

It's not yet clear whether Democrats can garner enough of it. Another prominent Republican, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., announced Monday that he will oppose the Toomey-Manchin amendment.

"Instead of expanding a broken background check system, let's fix it," he said.

But Democrats could lose a handful of their own -- for instance, two Democrats facing reelection next year opposed last week's motion -- which would require even more Republican support.

... too bad they ALL ain't facing reelection, next year!

[rugersol]

So much for the SAF being the last true friend we have in the fight to keep our rights.

... I wouldn't say that!

[The Lance]

I truly believe that you acted too hastily by doing so. Gotlieb more then likely singlehandedly wrote this bill to get it introduced to get some democrats to vote for this bill and claimed they did something.

There were many good things in this bill that he added like no nics checks for ccw holders. We no longer can get delayed.. Sounds good to me.

It was removed, but was originally in the bill of national repricocity of concealed carry.. That would have been wonderful too.

Background checks at gun shows will do nothing he knew that. But it was provisioned so the Democrats had to vote for it. So they couldn't claim that nothing was done. Going to an ffl to sell a gun to someone who isn't a family member or close friend. Which exonerated the seller from any wrong doing committed by the buyer sounds good to me too..

Especially if the buyer immediately gets to leave with said firearm(s)

It's a genius move in a complicated poker game that they can back out of any time due to ridiculous amendments being added.. Worry about the other "universal background check" bill not this one. At this moment in time.

[XDM45]

@photogpat - Maybe. That may be one angle, one part or the whole of it, I don't know. I think you have a good point and potential scenario.

@witeox - Thanks for the reference to my thread on namecalling.

@All

"Us*ful j*w"?? Really? I have shake my head at that comment and I must also commend everyone for hopping on the post of that and NOT on the poster of it. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this goes right into the core of what my post on namecalling is about. Furthermore, another problem is that search engines will spider out and grab keywords which may lead people here. If we post without namecalling and other hyperbolic words, then those search engines can't find those words here because we haven't posted them. It's just one more way we look bad and the antis eat that stuff up. To paraphrase George S. Patton: The idea is not to fall on your own sword for your beliefs, make the other bast*rd fall on his sword willingly for his beliefs." Let them make fools of themselves. they don't need our help for that anyway.

As for the SAF and this bill, who knows. It's politics. GOCRA and the NRA tried to give MN HF1325 with other HF and SF bills that would actually affect crime and Paymar didn't want to hear it. Washington is the same thing, only on a bigger scale, that's all. Those liars have perfected the art of making an agenda look like one thing when really it's another.

[.45 Auto]

To be clear, it was the CCRKBA that did this, not the SAF, although that is probably just a distinction without a difference, since it's pretty much the same people.

Mike - in Sherburne County

[EllisW]

So much for the SAF being the last true friend we have in the fight to keep our rights.

... I wouldn't say that!

Oh, I included the NRA in that statement.

[CarRacer]

https://twitter.com/KellyO/status/324487269052452864

Sen. Joe Manchin tells me "we will not get the votes today" expanded background checks to fail in Senate. Try again he says.

[Flyby]

The background check amendment failed 54-46 in the senate just now

[DoxaPar]

Yay! This is very good news.

Now, maybe they'll get serious about measures that will actually help increase school safety / security (regardless of the origin on the idea).

[IDPA Shooter]

So did DI Fi ban bill 40 for , 60 against , but not before she ranted about it and was allowed to talk over her allotted 2 minutes. The national carry bill did much better, 57 to 43, I believe. Chuck Schumer is having fits..... Al and Amy voting against all gun rights, big surprise there

[Heffay]

The background check amendment failed 54-46 in the senate just now

Damn democrats, taking away our gun rights!

[JK-linux]

Obama was on the TV for like 20 minutes whining about losing, elaborating on how let down he was that we missed his boat so completely. Bunch of dumb asses that we are, dont-cha-know. It's embarrassing for the country, him going on like that. I'll give him credit though... He did a great job of making it sound like somehow the vote did away with existing laws or something. My wife said it sounded like, starting tomorrow, all felons and mental cases can now feel free to order guns for home delivery off of Amazon or something.

[NMRMN]

Please be aware that what are being voted on now are amendments to Harry Reid’s Omnibus anti-gun bill.

After the amendments are dealt with, Reid’s legislative package will be voted up or down. Reid has already voted against the more moderate Schumer-Manchin-Toomey amendment, showing a preference for the original Schumer bill.

While all of this is very interesting, there is only one vote that matters. The up or down vote that will put Harry Reid’s S. 649 on the lawbooks, or send it to oblivion.

read more: http://extranosalley.com/?p=43036

[job10]

They pulled their support of the bill this morning....wonder why?

http://www.thegunmag.com/ccrkba-pulls-s ... k-measure/