Well, my first attempt to live blog today didn’t go so well when the Democratic gun control sponsors decided not to stream their press conference to the public after promising they would do so. With that, I’m moving on to the feds and their bill.
So far, we’ve just got lots of panning around the room looking at reporters.
Joe Manchin starts off, calling Pat Toomey his “good friend,” along with Chuck Schumer and Mark Kirk as being key to this gun control bill.
Manchin says there’s still a lot of work left to do. It’s a deal with Schumer, not a deal with Manchin. It’s not clear who is actually writing the bill.
Manchin says that we need a federal government commission to study violence.
Manchin is using the promotion words of anti-gun groups by calling this “gunsense.” He says that this bill is this “gunsense.”
He just keeps saying that it’s about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and insane people, but won’t offer specifics at all.
Manchin still loves Pat Toomey, his “dear friend.”
Toomey is now speaking.
Toomey applauds his staff for their work on the bill – the same staff who were telling voters that Pat Toomey wasn’t working with Manchin at all. Trust.
Toomey says that there’s no gun control in background checks at all. He won’t volunteer what kind of issues he’s promoting other than lots and lots of background checks.
Toomey now claims he didn’t seek out working on gun control, but then immediately complains about how there was a “risk” that no gun control would pass. He says he reached out to Manchin & Kirk.
He now points out that background checks aren’t a cure for crime.
Toomey says that no records would be mandated from private citizens, but he won’t volunteer exactly what he means by requirements of background checks at gun shows and online.
Toomey claims that gun owners get benefits, but he refuses to say what they are.
This will be an amendment, so those of us outside probably won’t see any language.
Manchin says he’s “been in dialogue” with NRA, but he admits that he can’t actually speak for how the organization will react.
In taking questions, Manchin is just repeating the same things he said earlier in the press conference. He claims that he strengthened his own personal gun rights, but he still won’t say what he’s actually promoting.
Toomey was asked if his NRA ‘A’ rating even matters to him, whether he’s worried about it. He says he only cares about what people want.
Toomey is asked if he’ll get more Republicans between him & Kirk. Toomey admits he has absolutely no idea if there’s any other Republican who supports this.
Manchin has pledged to vote for the bill, no matter what it is, if his amendment is on it. Toomey says that because other amendments could be added, he won’t pledge to vote for it.
Manchin is specifically asked about private sales, and he just says that gun sales at shows and online will be covered.
Toomey is challenged on the benefit for gun owners. He just gives an example, not a list. It sounds like strengthening FOPA while driving. It supposedly fixes where active duty military can buy guns.
Toomey is then asked whether the driving protections are a “first step” toward national concealed carry reciprocity. Manchin jumps in and say, “YES!” Toomey more quietly says that he supports it.
I’m assuming that there’s some content the reporters have that we don’t because there’s something about concealed carry licenses protecting you from arrest at NY airports while traveling.
Manchin promises that when he gave the talking points to his political friends back home and they are fine with it.
Toomey goes to the Morning Call for the last question. She asks him if he’s bringing along House Republicans from the Philly suburbs along on this bill. He said that there is interest, but they want to know what’s really in the bill first.
If they’re calling Chuck Schumer friend. We’re fucked.
What the hell, did Toomey have an affair and they’re threatening to release photos if they don’t join them.
Deal with Schumer? Not with Manchin? Ohhh-brother…let’s grab out ankles now…
…meant to write, let’s grab our ankles now…
Private sales are their target.
I can’t believe that the guy talking is a NRA A rated guy.
Manchin just said that ONLY gun shows and internet sales will be targeted.
So nothing will change on internet sales. He sounds like means only FFLs will be allowed at gun shows.
The devil is in the details.
what about arms list? they are internet ads that lead to private sales?
http://www.toomey.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=965
Thanks for the link, some good info on it…but even as it states:
“The bill will not create a national registry; in fact, it specifically makes it illegal to establish any such registry.”
This doesn’t mean that they can’t simply go ahead and look at the now-mandated record that will be kept for whatever damn well reason they please!?
Or am I not thinking about this the correct way?
ya keep believing that.
“- Closes the gun show and other loopholes while exempting temporary transfers and transfers between family members.”
There’s your private sale ban.
With these excemptions
“- Authorizes use of a state concealed carry permit instead of a background check when purchasing a firearm from a dealer.
– Family transfers and some private sales (friends, neighbors, other individuals) are exempt from background checks”
How the hell will friend be legally defined?
The devil is in the details.
What is the acutal language of the bill?
Yeah some good stuff in there but overall its a bad bill. I want to see the language.
Quick Quiz:
Pat Toomey is a:
A Moron
B Liar
C Coward
D Traitor
E All of the Above
F. A one term Senator.
David,
#commentwin
So show us the language, Senator.
So if we have universal background checks….why can’t we buy firearms in any state? We can buy cars in any state.
And if any gun control gets passed, we need some common sense gun laws. So that if you’re traveling through NY state and your car breaks down. You aren’t made a felon…
Both good questions
Voted for Toomey in 2010. I’ll vote for the Dem before I vote for Toomey again. At least a Dem will be consistent.
I wonder if Tom Smith who ran against Casey will throw his hat in the ring……..I’ll get out my checkbook.
Why? He didn’t seem to have a fantastic campaign.
Please, God, no. After seeing the terrible debate performance on Channel 6 we do not want Tom Smith to run.
Even if they have watered down the bill to make it more palatable, the fact remains that they are trying to kill gun shows. Attacking the community that upholds the second amendment is worse than any actual gun control they could pass.
we dont want to give them ANYTHING. why give our enemies any political victories at all? they will dance and think “next tragedy we will get more”
NO WE STOP THEM HERE AND NOW. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE NOT UP FOR DEBATE
Actually, now that I look at what Toomey is promising, some of the items he and Manchin added look very much like a “poison pill” for the Democrats (assuming this amendment gets added, and no other bad ones get added.) I’d wager that there are some democrats out there who won’t be able to stomach the fixes implemented by this bill, even if it does close the “gun show loophole”
– actively forbids any kind of national registry (including criminal penalties for misusing data)
– allows interstate handgun sales
– allows use of CCW permit instead of a background check
– attempts to shorten the delay caused by background checks
– increase FOPA protections
Now, I don’t trust either of these politicians, but some of the things promised in this amendment have me grinning a little. I still won’t support any ban on private sales, but if these other additions cause the bill to go down in flames (due to democrats refusing to vote for it), then I’ll be very happy.
NJ and NY violate FOPA all the time and the Feds don’t do anything. Why would this change anything?
That is a good point… ultimately, I’d like to see “FOPA with teeth”. i.e. – if you are arrested for possessing a firearm in NJ, even though you are exempted, the arresting officer faces jail time and fines, plus you can sue everyone from the arresting officer to the governor for damages.
However, I won’t turn down expansions on FOPA protection, except (as in this case) when they come at the cost of banning private transfers.
We already have the law saying that the purchase of a firearm with a LTCF is legal and no PICS check is needed. The State Police do not allow it.
I see us being at the mercy of this law, and any protection it may offer will just be blocked by those who hold the power.
I “heard” that National Concealed Carry was in the bill but Schumer made them take it out. Probably because Toomey is a little bitch, I guess.
Toomey is a globalist- no different than the rest.
Those motherf**kers.
That is all.
Here:
“Schumer negotiated several changes to the initial Manchin-Toomey proposal, including striking language from the agreement allowing concealed permit holders to carry their weapons in other states, and limiting Internet sales to five guns per year. He also worked to make sure there is a 72-hour window for performing background checks except for gun-show sales, which will be cleared in 48 hours initially.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/gun-background-checks-deal-89856.html?hp=t2_s
I have already written my Senators of my opposition to this train wreck of a bill. This still has a record keeping requirement which is a poison pill as far as I am concerned. Additionally it seems to have a very questionable restriction on in state commerce by requiring background checks on person to person sales that are advertised on or offline. All I can say to this latest attack on our rights is a resounding [B]HELL NO!!![/B]