Last Updated:October 30 @ 06:18 am

Senators seek back room deal on firearm background checks

By Associated Press

WASHINGTON - A bipartisan quartet of senators, including two National Rifle Association members and two with "F" ratings from the potent firearms lobby, are quietly trying to find a compromise on expanding the requirement for gun-sale background checks.

A deal, given a good chance by several participants and lobbyists, could add formidable political momentum to one of the key elements of President Barack Obama's gun control plan. Currently, background checks are required only for sales by the nation's 55,000 federally licensed gun dealers, but not for gun show, person-to-person sales or other private transactions.

The senators' talks have included discussions about ways to encourage states to make more mental health records available to the national system and the types of transactions that might be exempted from background checks, such as sales among relatives or to those who have permits to carry concealed weapons, said people who spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to describe the negotiations publicly.

The private discussions involve liberal Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who is the No. 3 Senate Democratic leader; West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, an NRA member and one of the chamber's more moderate Democrats; Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., another NRA member and one of the more conservative lawmakers in Congress; and moderate GOP Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois.

"It will not limit your ability to borrow your Uncle Willie's hunting rifle or share a gun with your friend at a shooting range," Schumer said last week in one of the senators' few public remarks about the package the group is seeking. He said he believed a bipartisan deal could be reached.

Polls show that requiring background checks for nearly all gun purchases has more public support than Obama's proposals to ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines, and it is among those given the best chance of enactment. Even so, it is opposed by the NRA and many congressional Republicans, who consider it intrusive and unworkable for a system they say already has flaws.

"My problem with background checks is you're never going to get criminals to go through background checks," Wayne LaPierre, NRA executive vice president, told the Senate Judiciary Committee at its gun control hearing last week.

An agreement among the four senators could help overcome that opposition by opening the door to support from other conservative Republicans besides Coburn. It also could make it easier to win backing from Democratic senators from GOP-leaning states, many of whom face re-election next year and who have been leery of embracing Obama's proposals.

Schumer and Kirk each have "F" scores from the NRA, while Coburn and Manchin have "A" ratings.

Prompted by the December massacre of 20 first-graders and six adults in Newtown, Conn., the Democratic-led Judiciary Committee plans to write gun control legislation in the next few weeks. The committee's chairman, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., has expressed strong support for universal background checks and it is expected to be a cornerstone of his bill, but a version of that language with bipartisan support could give the entire package a boost.

"If the language is meaningful, it would be obviously a huge step," said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, which represents child welfare, religious and other groups favoring gun curbs. "To have someone like Coburn, who's voted consistently with the gun lobby, to come out and endorse a meaningful background check would be very helpful."

It is likely that any gun-control bill will need 60 votes to pass the 100-member Senate. Democrats have 55 votes, including two Democratic-leaning independents.

Leaders of the GOP-run House are planning to see what, if anything, the Senate passes before moving on gun legislation. Strategists believe that a measure that passes the Senate with clear bipartisan support could pressure the House to act.

Federal data on gun purchases is gathered by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which is run by the FBI.

According to Justice Department estimates, the federal and state governments ran 108 million background checks of firearms sales between 1994 when the requirement became law and 2009. Of those, 1.9 million - almost 2 percent - were denied, usually because would-be purchasers had criminal records.

People legally judged to be "mentally defective" are among those blocked by federal law from firearms purchases. States are supposed to make mental health records available to the federal background check system and receive more generous Justice Department grants if they do, but many provide little or no such data because of privacy concerns or antiquated record-keeping systems.

Coburn got involved in the background check talks about two weeks ago and says a compromise could make it harder for dangerous people to acquire firearms.

"The whole goal is to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminals," he said in a brief interview.

Manchin could be particularly influential with Democrats like Sens. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, and Mark Pryor, D-Ark., who face re-election next year in deeply Republican states. Besides being an NRA member, Manchin ran a campaign ad in 2010 in which he promised to defend West Virginian's Second Amendment rights to bear arms and "take on" the Obama administration - all while shooting a hole in a copy of a Democratic bill that would have clamped limits on greenhouse gases - another sore spot for a coal-mining state like West Virginia.

In an interview, Manchin said that besides hoping for a background check compromise, he wanted inclusion of a commission that would study "how our culture has gotten so desensitized toward violence."

Participating senators declined to provide details of the talks. But people following the discussions say the talks have touched on:

-The types of family relatives who would be allowed to give guns to each other without a background check.

-Possibly exempting sales in remote areas.

-Whether to help some veterans who sought treatment for traumatic stress disorder - now often barred from getting firearms - become eligible to do so.

An NRA spokesman, Andrew Arulanandam, declined to comment on the senators' discussions.

---

A service of YellowBrix, Inc.

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rate this post:
Rating: 6.7/10 (50 votes cast)
Senators seek back room deal on firearm background checks, 6.7 out of 10 based on 50 ratings





Don't leave yet! Add a comment below or check out these other great stories:

46 Comments

  1. petarkComment by petark
    February 8, 2013 @ 2:27 pm

    Backroom deals . . . what are these guys up to? Ruling (Political) Class v the Country Class.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (48 votes cast)
    • PeregrineComment by peregrine
      February 8, 2013 @ 2:36 pm

      They are what they have always been up to, create a fire storm then a bait and switch. Force you to take the lesser evil. Can you say Overton Window? Baby steps just make the trip longer, but you still get to the destination.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (49 votes cast)
    • ltparComment by ltpar
      February 8, 2013 @ 3:25 pm

      In case you hadn’t noted, that is the way business has been done in the Senate for the last 100 years. Their ego’s suggest to them that they are better than the mortal man, speak very little evil of each other and scratch each others backs as well as other parts of the body. Pretty sorry way to do the country’s business, but you get what you elect.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (35 votes cast)
    • BobinmsComment by Bobinms
      February 8, 2013 @ 3:47 pm

      What’s the Repubs getting for all this compromising. There’s more Repubs than Dems in the group.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (21 votes cast)
    • CharlieComment by vietnamvet
      February 8, 2013 @ 5:28 pm

      Not Another Back Room Deal!

      What is wronng with our legislators? Why can’t anybody stand out in the open and discuss the pros and cons of a proposal?
      We REALLY need to clean out a bunch of riff-raff from the body that passes for ‘Congress’.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (32 votes cast)
    • oleteabagComment by oleteabag
      February 8, 2013 @ 11:09 pm

      What they’re “up to” is trying to make gutting the Second Amendment more cosmetically pleasing so they can slide it past the “sheeple”. “Universal background checks” means “universal registration”, which means the Feds know where all the guns are when they get around to deciding to confiscate them all.

      The plain truth is, NOBODY would have problems with background checks OR registration if you could trust the Feds not to enlarge on that and steal our Second Amendment rights out from under us a piece at a time.

      But you CAN’T trust the Feds not to do that–especially NOT with the Communist-In-Chief in the White House. With his UTTER disregard for the rule of law and the Constitution, he has already proven he cannot be trusted to respect our Constitutional rights and leave them alone. Why would we trust that slimy little weasel in THIS instance, any more than we trust him in any OTHER? He and his power-grabbing ways and penchant for trampling the Constitution under his feet are probably responsible for the sale of more guns than any other factor in the past century.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (13 votes cast)
    • republicanrearguardnotComment by republicanrearguardnot
      February 9, 2013 @ 1:47 am

      The article says that the NRA has rated Senators. Democrat Senators Schumer and Senator Kick each have, “F” ratings. Republican Senators Coburn and Manchin have, “A” rating from the NRA. And These 4 Senators are negotiating behind closed doors? It’s an OXYMORON. A’s are Defenders of the Republic,and thus would never talk with “F” (Never). Thus the Two, “A” at best, in truth are, “C”. The NRA’s Senator ratings thus have no Digestibility. I wonder if the NRA is shinning ON real Defenders of The Republic,,,Again? The Republicans have yet to Refuse The Line and then Push Back, from before TARP unto today. TARP, CZARS, Stimulus, borrowed money to Europe And South American Banks, Cash for Clunkers,Health Care (cold rationing of CARE but generous with the) HELL, $700 billion “cuts” to Medicare That Democrats Call It As $700 billion in Medicare spending reductions for Health Care Hell needed Some Help not to Forget Bush Plant, Chief Justice Roberts playing his Part, Looks Like A TAX, , National Defense Act, John O’Boehner’s 200 House Member Tour of The White House, John Boehner’s 100 Billion Promised CUT that Turned Out To Be a 2.3 BILLION Increase, Budget Control Act of August 2011, Speaker John O’Boehner Abrogation of HOUSE Constitutional DUTY to the Executive Branch, The House brushing aside, “Fast and Furious” and then “Benghazi” Beating, Rape and Murder of Ambassador Stevens and fellow U.S. Citizens, ,Oh yes and the Cliff Deal too. THe federal Government has the LOOT now of today’s Generation and of Generations Yet To be Born, of those that get past Abortion. Now it’s time for Clean Up Work, the gutting of the 2nd Amendment as Republicans sit quite, waiting for instructions from HQ of The Republican Rear Guard of This Very Day. What Say You Karol ROVE, Hannity’s, “The Architect”?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (6 votes cast)
    • lokiswifeComment by lokiswife
      February 9, 2013 @ 1:56 am

      Backroom deals are how the country ended up with that lovely “stimulus”, Obamacare, a Consumer Protection bill that is gravy for the banksters, and hundreds of other stinky deals that we haven’t heard about yet. Don’t pay too much attention to what the media is parading on the front stage, watch what is going on behind the black curtain at the back of the room – Benghazi. If you haven’t read Panetta’s testimony yet, find it and read it. It is more damning to Obama than the earlier BS testimory by Hillary…with luck, it will be enough to get him impeached before he destroys the country and makes an unreversible mess of the rest of the world.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.1/5 (9 votes cast)
  2. brucedeitrickpriceComment by brucedeitrickprice
    February 8, 2013 @ 2:39 pm

    Do you need a background check to get a driver’s license?

    The real problem with this whole project is that liberals are dreaming of giving shrinks more power. Stop right there. If you took the wrong pill or had a bad dream, some psychiatrist will say you’re maybe a little crazy so you failed your background check. Please don’t go there.

    Of course, the really crazy criminals won’t be inconvenienced.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (46 votes cast)
    • shutterComment by shutter
      February 8, 2013 @ 3:08 pm

      The problem with this is that a shrink that is for more gun control might deliberately put things in your record to allow guns to be taken from you and tell the police afterwards so they will take your guns.

      If a shrink is an atheist and thinks Christians are crazy, he could put derogatory things in your record.

      I’m all for seriously mentally disturbed people from having guns, like people that have documented with abusing anything, but not everything we might deem as mentally damaged is grounds for denying the person from having a gun. I think homosexuals are mentally damaged, but I don’t think that would preclude a homosexual from having a gun.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (28 votes cast)
    • ltparComment by ltpar
      February 8, 2013 @ 3:31 pm

      Some places, you don’t even have to be a citizen to get a drivers license.

      On the comment about “shrinks.” While there are a few decent ones out there , most are dysfunctional and have their own therapists. That means the inmates are running the asylum.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (29 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      February 8, 2013 @ 3:42 pm

      No shrink should be able to take away your 2nd Amendment rights. There is already a law prohibiting mentally ill people from owning a firearm, but that person must have been adjudicated as mentally ill by a COURT OF LAW. We must depend on the integrity of our judicial system rather than the whims of some shrink or any other person who wants to have that much control over another person’s life.

      The bottom line with all this discussion of mental issues is just a smoke screen to allow the Veterans Administration to submit to the FBI the names of military personnel who have been treated by VA shrinks because of mental issues stemming from unlimited war and endless deployments. It’s OK to arm them and send them to Iraq or Afghanistan for 5-6 tours, but when they finally come home they can’t be trusted to own a firearm. WHY? Because Janet Napolitano has already identified them as “domestic terrorists”. Obama mentioned adding these names to the FBI National Criminal Background Check a couple of years ago and the blowback he received shut him down for a while.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (36 votes cast)
  3. g8rangieComment by g8rangie
    February 8, 2013 @ 2:43 pm

    Once again, there is no gun show loophole. Why doesn’t anyone correct the biased stories put out by AP?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (32 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      February 8, 2013 @ 2:52 pm

      Primarily because the gun show loophole falsehood keeps the emotions stirring and the ignorant liberals don’t ever question what the media puts out.

      “It will not limit your ability to borrow your Uncle Willie’s hunting rifle or share a gun with your friend at a shooting range,” Schumer said last week” Another lie that the Democrats like to mention any time they have an opportunity. The Second Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting or gun-range shooting. But Democrats are expected to lie because they are liars by nature.

      When they mention a “backroom deal” I vividly remember how we got Obamacare rammed down our throats. There should be a demand and insistence that Congress operate with full transparency because the decisions they make affect the lives of every individual in this nation.

      Rather than mandatory background checks, it should be mandatory for every citizen to receive a complete list of EVERY vote cast by their Congress critters, and a THOROUGH background check completed on every politician because the information they are allowed to receive should require a TOP SECRET clearance.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (44 votes cast)
    • oleteabagComment by oleteabag
      February 8, 2013 @ 11:17 pm

      You are quite right, bna42! There is ENTIRELY too much “backroom”, secret dealing in Congress. The Congress is accountable to US–not to each other in Congress or that little weasel in the White House. They need to stop doing things in the middle of the night and behind closed doors. EVERY thing they do should be published on-line where it can be scrutinized. That includes debate on issues BEFORE they go passing laws like Obamacare, which was mostly done in the dead of night and behind closed doors. Then we had the Queen of the Moonbats telling us they needed to pass it “so we could find out what was in it.” Well, what’s wrong with us knowing what is in it BEFORE it is passed? Who in HELL do Obama and Congress think they are, that they should do stuff in secret that they KNOW the majority of voters OPPOSE, and they do it in secret so they can go ahead and do whatever they want without regard to the people who pay their salaries. This needs to STOP. We are already 7/8ths of the way to a dictatorship. Let’s not let them take away what few rights we have left!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (5 votes cast)
    • empty pocketsComment by empty pockets
      February 9, 2013 @ 8:19 am

      “Why doesn’t anyone correct…?” Because we are in the D-zone. D being the grade just before total failure.

      We’ve got dupes, dolts and dimwits in charge as well as “reporting” and–don’t forget–voting.

      Know what congress critters do in the dark of back rooms? Same thing roaches do in the dark. Multiply the filth.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  4. lwessonComment by lwesson
    February 8, 2013 @ 2:49 pm

    “Shall not be infringed” is unintelligible to those whose mission is to ultimately disarm We the People, so an incremental approach is being agreed upon by the swaggering Power Elite.

    Allowing the Government to know just who has firearms is the first BIG step to the goal of confiscation. One simply needs to look at 1984 England and see how it was done to the SUBJECTS of Das Stat.

    Good intentions, BS. All atop a perhaps shaped up ruse as to whether there was ANY rifle used, or was it just pistols as ABC said per Sandy Hook. And those guys running off into the woods? Benghazi 2 ?

    And per, Stop Gun Violence. What a disingenuous group. I think they should do some hands on research and hang with the Homeys in Chicago for some months, or Detroit, or… and if any get out alive, then they can write a book… called, Stop Stupid People, decrease gun crime.

    No, it is me and you, GOP people, that they are aiming at in disarming. They have NO understanding as to the dangers of the State, likely no fondness for The Constitution or Bill of Rights (if it does not support their agenda) and likely cheer on a Tyranny.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (37 votes cast)
  5. BillzillaComment by Billzilla
    February 8, 2013 @ 3:12 pm

    If this backroom deal comes to fruition, they’ll exempt themselves of course, I for one will not register any firearm, I may or may not own.

    Hitler disarmed the ordinary citizens of Germany first, before his thugs came to load them into cattle cars, for the ride to the concentration/death camps. It just seems to me that they would have been better off taking a few of Hitlers thugs with them, and getting it over with quickly, rather than die very slow and painful deaths. Perhaps I’m wrong, but I don’t think that I am.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (24 votes cast)
    • oleteabagComment by oleteabag
      February 8, 2013 @ 11:20 pm

      I’m sure they WILL exempt themselves–that is an automatic part of every law they write nowadays. After all, they are the RULERS, and should not be subject to the same rules as us peasants. You can BET that hag, Feinstein is not about to give up HER concealed carry, just because she wants to take YOURS.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
    • RPComment by RP
      February 9, 2013 @ 1:11 am

      There are no loop holes in Virginia gun shows. All dealers inside the gun show have to have a firearms license. The only loop holes would be from people outside the show selling or trading their goods. I have heard of people doing that, but it isn’t but a small part of what goes on. That is not part of the gun show.

      As far as back room deals are concerned, they know they can’t get this done through regular legislation. They have to do it behind everyone’s back. What gets me is the fact that nothing is done to penalize the criminals. All of their regulations only punishes the innocent. Criminals don’t care about the law.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (6 votes cast)
  6. usafoldsargeComment by usafoldsarge
    February 8, 2013 @ 3:21 pm

    are idiots born that way?????????

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.3/5 (13 votes cast)
    • BobinmsComment by Bobinms
      February 8, 2013 @ 3:50 pm

      Liberals don’t think with their heads. They think with their hearts, sex organs, etc.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (13 votes cast)
    • usnret1994Comment by usnret1994
      February 10, 2013 @ 9:31 am

      No. They are dumbed down to that level by the “education system”!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  7. mrickyridgeComment by mrickyridge
    February 8, 2013 @ 3:21 pm

    bna42 + lwesson,

    Both of you bring up terrific points. too bad too many people are too stupid or too ignorant to see where this dangerous road leads to. Typical democrat sneeky back room deals with the stupid republicans who actually believe them. When they can’t get the votes, steal them any way possible. Maybe all poilticians should have their backgrounds checked criminally, and especially psycholigically because most of them have no common sense or can’t see past their own selfish needs. These laws affect everyone and unfortunately most people have their heads (you know where) and then when it’s enacted it becomes to late to repeal it.
    Maybe obama and his cronies should walk these detroit, newark, chicago, philadelphia streets on their own at night and see if they want some way to protect themselves. Look at diane feinstein, what a hypocrite.What goes for us shouldn’t go for them?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (23 votes cast)
    • lwessonComment by lwesson
      February 8, 2013 @ 3:51 pm

      I swear mrickyridge, a Shrink would find the vast number of Politicos with a fully affixed sociopath disorder.

      Itpar up above brings out the clear point that most Shrinks have Shrinks.

      And, if Shrinks were used by Das Stat, they could and would, the majority of them, line up like dutiful soldiers, and commit near everyone of us… You see this like a freak show per what they do to kids. “Little Johnny is too hyper, here give him these drugs…”

      My favorite character of a Shrink, is the insecure, know it all idiot on Miracle on 34th Street working at Macy’s that tries to commit Santa Claus. No M.Scott Peck here, (The Road Less Traveled, People of the Lie) by any measure. Humm, People of the Lie. Washington is full of them!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (12 votes cast)
  8. rokkyComment by rokky
    February 8, 2013 @ 3:22 pm

    Is it possible that history may be repeating itself?
    In the 1930′s a guy by the name of Adolph Hitler gathered up all the guns from the citizens of Germany and some of us are aware of the results of that act.

    Unfortunately, it seems our schools no longer teach this in their history classes leaving a whole generation or two clueless.
    Otherwise, I’m sure there would be a much bigger outcry on all these new gun laws being proposed by our Government and the Liberals.

    Time to pay attention America.
    Our freedoms are in the balance.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (24 votes cast)
  9. roystoll2Comment by roystoll2
    February 8, 2013 @ 3:22 pm

    What gives these idiots the right to control any guns. They are specifically precluded from doing just that in our Constitution. I cannot believe that any sane American citizen would even think of bargaining our unalienable rights away.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (22 votes cast)
  10. vComment by v
    February 8, 2013 @ 3:35 pm

    Part of the problem is all of the Immigrants and ILLEGAL ALIENS from marxist communist socialist radical muslim want Legal US Citizens Disarmed!
    Sick of backdoor DEALS and the Legal US Citizens NO LONGER HAVE ANY REPRESENTATION!
    ALL Elected-Appointed Government Officials should have a through background-mental history check done being being able to run for office or accept an appointment and this includes proving their birth and their associates!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.5/5 (10 votes cast)
  11. wedeyComment by wedey
    February 8, 2013 @ 3:37 pm

    Wouldn’t it just be easier to have a national database where doctors, educators etc will list people they suspect with mental conditions than having every gun owner register. How is the data base on illegals in this country. I bet there is no way right now anyone in govt can tell me what people are illegals and where they are. And how many more people will we have to put on the government payroll to take care of all this. We can’t even find out what went down with Fast and Furious and Benghazi, not a name of a person that ordered it, signed it, acknowledged it or whatever. And if you have to register to get a gun, I wonder how long it will take for them to process your request. They haven’t even acted on the Keystone pipeline yet.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.0/5 (15 votes cast)
  12. odayterrenceComment by odayterrence
    February 8, 2013 @ 3:54 pm

    Did anyone see the mountain of gun-control bills just put out by the state government of California? The Politicians want to proudly have the most restrictive gun-control laws in the nation. Effectively criminalizing current legal gun owners and ending gun ownership. They readily state they know it won’t do anything about gun violence…but that doesn’t matter to them. They want to be seen as “doing something”…even if that something is destroying the Constituion of California.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.5/5 (15 votes cast)
    • Haywood JablomieComment by Haywood Jablomie
      February 8, 2013 @ 4:51 pm

      A leftwing state representative in Arizona has presented a bill that would make the POSSESSION of a magazine holding more than 10 rounds a FELONY.

      What has our country become when such extreme leftists can be elected to public office???

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (12 votes cast)
  13. handshake2012Comment by handshake2012
    February 8, 2013 @ 4:12 pm

    The expansion of the background check system needs to focus on the problem, not the tool. With proper safeguards, add the names of the folks who take certain perscription medications or who are diagnosed as potentially dangerous. That is the only list we should entrust to anyone as sleazy as Eric Holder. A more complete analysis is available at the political prophet.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 1.0/5 (7 votes cast)
  14. DudleyComment by Dudley
    February 8, 2013 @ 4:22 pm

    Two republicans is not bi-partisan. These guys are incredible. Give then a pot of soup and they will piss in it every time. YOU CAN NOT ENFORCE UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS WITHOUT A NATIONAL FIREARMS REGISTRY. This is step one of a three step confiscation scheme.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (16 votes cast)
    • mogul264Comment by mogul264
      February 8, 2013 @ 4:35 pm

      The required firearms registry is precisely what we DO NOT need! When the Nazis invaded Holland (the Netherlands), the first thing they did was call at the local government office and get a list of gun owners (registration was the law of the land at that time). Then the Nazis went door to door demanding the arms. Those who wouldn’t relinquish them were summarily shot!

      Japan, in WWII, was warned by Yamamoto, architect of the Pearl Harbor raid, and who had studied in America, NOT to consider invading the U.S.! He said ‘there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass’!

      The LAST thing WE want, in case of an invasion, is a convenient list of who owns what arms, what type, etc! Granted this isn’t much of a possibility now, but who knows the future?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (15 votes cast)
    • Haywood JablomieComment by Haywood Jablomie
      February 8, 2013 @ 4:47 pm

      The leftists’ and RINO’s “background checks” ARE just a backdoor way to establish a national firearms registry.

      Once they make it a requirement that EVERY sale, including the private sale or transfer of personal firearms, be done by a federal firearms license holder, they will have their national registry.

      How? Simple: when a “background check” is done, each buyer must fill out a long form of personal identification and the serial number of the firearm is also recorded. Once this information is send to the feds for the “background check” and entered into a database, they have their national registry of firearms owners.

      It’s s shame that the media is nothing but a leftwing propaganda machine. A media that is NOT in the bag for the extreme left would expose this kind of government chicanery.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (10 votes cast)
  15. Haywood JablomieComment by Haywood Jablomie
    February 8, 2013 @ 4:41 pm

    Let’s hope that the voters remember these RINO Republicans at reelection time!

    We must examine everything for leftwing code. In the case of “background checks”, it’s really code for “REGISTRATION.”

    Here’s how it will work: they require that EVERY sale or transfer of a firearm go through a federal firearms dealer and a background check be done. They will record the serial number of the weapon and a long list of personal data on the seller and buyer. They will then KEEP this data in a federal database.

    How does this differ from national gun registration? Answer: There IS NO difference.

    This “backgorund check” is just a backdoor way to establish a federal firearms registry….and there’s ZERO evidence that it will make anyone safer.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (10 votes cast)
  16. digitheadrexComment by digitheadrex
    February 8, 2013 @ 5:02 pm

    So long as the FOPA prohibition on creating a registry of non-NFA firearms and the PII for approved NICS checks is still destroyed after 24 hours, I would not object to closing the non-existant loophole for gun shows.

    I still think they should exempt transfers between people who know each other. After all, there are federal laws against transferring guns to people who cannot purchase guns for themselves and prohibitions on straw man purchases and all forms of illegal trafficking, even though Obama apparently doesn’t now what is already on the books.

    The 1.9 million number is deceptive because it is the number of initial denials. The actual number is a very small fraction of those 1.9 million initial denials so that the actual number referred for prosecution are less than 100 per year with the conviction rate even less than that, obviously.

    Much the same can be said about the 40% number quoted by the proponents as the number of transfers that did not involve background checks. The survey it was based on was done on a small sample before the NICS system was in place. Besides, if the transfers don’t come to the attention of the government, how do they know how many there are?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.2/5 (5 votes cast)
    • usafoldsargeComment by usafoldsarge
      February 10, 2013 @ 12:36 pm

      With any president’s ability to use executive orders to get his way, he can declare a state of emergency, declare martial law during any disaster, natural or otherwise. With the Congress so willing to surrender so much of its responsibility to the president and/or the alphabet agencies and services of the government, there isn’t anything to prevent any government agency from confiscating your weapons. But, first they have to know where they are…..
      Ever been to a gun show?? You can’t get out of the building with a weapon, without filling out a ATF form 4473 and get a background check. Even the our local gunclub requires the background check for their raffle prizes and auction weapons. That loophole doesn’t exist, regardless of what Bloomberg might have to say. That ATF form 4473 must be kept by the dealer for 20 years. if the sale is denied, the dealer must keep that form for 5 years, if the dealer goes out of business- guess where those forms go????? What difference does it make where the 4473s are kept, all Federal agencies have access to these forms anytime they want….. BTW they must be filed in the dealers files in alphabetical order!
      .If you have a Concealed Carry permit, your fingerprints were sent to the FBI to have a much deeper background check.The FBI now knows that you potentially have a handgun(s). Your gun isn’t registered, but you are…. But they also know who was denied a CCW permit and that person may have guns anyways. So, like it or not, either the you and the gun you purchased are registered or you are registered as a person who was denied the right to purchase or conceal carry.
      New York State already has the word “Confiscate” in its new law and California has it in their new answer to Newtown, CT.. Some states have modified their constitution to prohibit weapons confiscation during disasters and emergencies-
      If you should sell a weapon to an individual, especially one that was bought prior to the start of the background check- don’t give him a receipt and don’t take a check……

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • republicanrearguardnotComment by republicanrearguardnot
      February 10, 2013 @ 1:26 pm

      usafoldsarge, you spell it out very well. One, can not hide and if anything, not much at all. I go by republicanrearguardnot ( even at that I humor myself with a Call Name) here and my want is to get people to realize that Republicans are shinning all of us on. From Speaker John O’ Boehner, Senate minority leader Mitch O’ McConnell, Senator John McCain, Eric Cantor, yes Paul Ryan, and even talk radio Hannity’s with his “The Architect” Karl ROVE attacking Tea Party Types.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  17. socialismisevilComment by socialismisevil
    February 8, 2013 @ 5:05 pm

    headlines should read: membership money wasted AGAIN for NRA members

    ANY COMPROMISE WITH WRONG, MEANS wrong wins

    just read a story 15yo boy is arrested for the 19th time in Chicago

    and this is but a tip of the iceberg

    WE KNOW THE TRUTH

    we all know that bad guys wont follow ANY LAWS

    we know the Dems love to put criminals out on the streets
    while the rinos go along to “save money”

    when the law is breaking the law

    its time for HUGE CHANGES

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (10 votes cast)
  18. lastdogmanComment by lastdogman
    February 8, 2013 @ 6:38 pm

    Any good machine shop can turn out fine firearms. Just takes some research.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.7/5 (3 votes cast)
  19. Pingback: It's a nightmare out there for gear. - Page 2

  20. dave4TexasComment by dave4Texas
    February 8, 2013 @ 9:57 pm

    If background checks are to weed out those dangerous persons who may pose a risk if their fingers were on a trigger of a weapon of any kind, when is someone in this lame congress or lame media going to DEMAND that a full, unbiased background check be done on our current Commander-in-Chief who has HIS finger on the trigger of the Military, CIA, FBI, Homeland Security, FEMA, etc., etc., that can be used against the American people at his mere whim? This same man has FAILED to pass eVerify by using an illegal Social Security number belonging to someone else. he has lied on ALL his government papers about who he is. This total fraud should NOT be in the White House! He should be residing at Gitmo!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.5/5 (8 votes cast)
  21. zdartComment by zdart
    February 8, 2013 @ 10:00 pm

    The liberal and those following the liberal camp all stand on their anti-gun soap box waving their sticky finger in the face of the gun owner, all the while holding a butcher knife behind their back consenting to the death of hundreds of innocent children daily through their abortion mill…Ahh.. thinking themselves wise they have become fools. Is it no wonder that it’s impossible to respect our government?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.5/5 (4 votes cast)
  22. oleteabagComment by oleteabag
    February 8, 2013 @ 11:26 pm

    They go for the incremental approach because they know that will lull the majority of the SHEEPLE back to sleep. They’ll hear all this “reasonable bipartisan compromise” BS coming out of Congress and think, “Oh, well, that is OK then.” Which, of course, will lessen opposition and set them up for the next step in the incremental dismantling of our Second Amendment Rights. A fringe benefit to this approach: it further isolates us “Conservative Gun Nuts”, making it easier for them to marginalize us as a bunch of “nuts”, so the Sheeple won’t be too alarmed when they start to round us up and ship us off to the Re-education, er, FEMA camps after they get what they want, which is to disarm us all.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
  23. Pingback: BEWARE Senators seek back room deal on firearm background checks | Reclaim Our Republic

  24. Pingback: Senators seek back room deal on firearm background checks

  25. usnret1994Comment by usnret1994
    February 10, 2013 @ 9:42 am

    NO DEALS! “Shall not be infringed” means EXACTLY that. The NFA of 34 and the GCA of 68 are both unconstitutional and null in void. http://constitution.org/uslaw/16amjur2nd.htm BTW the GCA of 68 mirrors Hitlers “Nazi Weapons Law (March 18, 1938)” almost verbatim.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)

Leave a Comment





Reference Pages

  • About
  • Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer