PDA

View Full Version : Manchin throwing us under the bus (Senator, WV)


Guntech
12-17-2012, 7:17 AM
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/renewed-and-some-new-support-for-gun-control/

What a ****ing phony. A rating from NRA based on what? The guy is a gunngrabber!

SanPedroShooter
12-17-2012, 7:31 AM
Clever dodge maybe?

'Have a discussion' followed by no action. Or a No vote.

I really does come down to how a person votes.

We all need to get on the same page here.

Decoligny
12-17-2012, 7:38 AM
“We’ve got to find a way to create a society in which those closest to people in trouble, mentally, acknowledge that” and help them secure assistance.

We used to have a society that did that. The "assistance" they secured was called being commited to an insane asylum, aka a psychiatric treatment facility.

What happens now when someone tries to "secure assistance" is they call the police. The police come, take a complaint, and drive away, often leaving the person "needing assistance" right where they started, in the home, with frightened family members in danger.

We used to keep the dangerous psychotic individuals under lock and key, with nurses on hand to ensure that they were regularly medicated. Then the liberals saw that while they were medicated they were not a danger, so they decided to let them out on the street with a perscription for their anti-psychotic drugs, and a stern warning of "Be sure you take your meds every day!"

Seems to be working great, not ya think! :rolleyes:

HowardW56
12-17-2012, 7:45 AM
“We’ve got to find a way to create a society in which those closest to people in trouble, mentally, acknowledge that” and help them secure assistance.

We used to have a society that did that. The "assistance" they secured was called being commited to an insane asylum, aka a psychiatric treatment facility.

What happens now when someone tries to "secure assistance" is they call the police. The police come, take a complaint, and drive away, often leaving the person "needing assistance" right where they started, in the home, with frightened family members in danger.

We used to keep the dangerous psychotic individuals under lock and key, with nurses on hand to ensure that they were regularly medicated. Then the liberals saw that while they were medicated they were not a danger, so they decided to let them out on the street with a perscription for their anti-psychotic drugs, and a stern warning of "Be sure you take your meds every day!"

Seems to be working great, not ya think! :rolleyes:


The change is how the mentally ill are handles was a result of a Supreme Court decision, Connor v. Donaldson 422 U.S. 563 (1975)

Safety1st
12-17-2012, 10:16 AM
He sure did.

"I don't know anyone who in the hunting or sporting arena that goes out with an assault rifle. I don't know anybody that needs 30 rounds in the clip to go hunting," Manchin said. "I mean, these are things that need to be talked about."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/joe-manchin-gun-control_n_2314782.html

Legasat
12-17-2012, 10:25 AM
Problem is, the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING TO DO WITH HUNTING!

Sutcliffe
12-17-2012, 10:30 AM
How many members of our legislature are really interested in the Bill Of Rights? Or, are they just liking the support of a lobby that carries a big stick and will bail out on us when they see it convenient?

IVC
12-17-2012, 10:33 AM
Don't read too much into it. I'd prefer them have "a dialog" and "a discussions" rather than create any new legislation. The more they talk and the less they work on this issue the better.

CalBear
12-17-2012, 11:16 AM
I think we'll see more politicians throw us under the bus, and other NRA members, gun owners, etc. The emotional response to these tragedies is extremely strong. People will throw at least some gun rights in the bin to avoid being labeled callous or pro-violence after this. You're going to see lots of people kicking AWs to the curb after this.

ICONIC
12-17-2012, 11:20 AM
What else is new; hunters and SASS shooters threw gun owners under the bus the first time around with the AWB. What do you expect to change. He is just looking out for his own.

kaligaran
12-17-2012, 11:28 AM
Hunting? Here we go again.
I'm so sick of hearing anti-gunners talk about guns for hunting.

I personally think hunting is morally wrong unless you eat/use the animal. And since I'm a vegetarian, I don't hunt anything except paper and clay.

I guess 2A doesn't apply to me then. Where do I hand in my ARs and my 'American' card?
/facepalm

IVC
12-17-2012, 11:42 AM
I personally think hunting is morally wrong unless you eat/use the animal. And since I'm a vegetarian, I don't hunt anything except paper and clay.

Yet your diet kills orders of magnitude more animals, including all the mammals competing for your food, loss of habitat, etc. There is virtually zero footprint on environment from regulated hunting, while rain forest is being cleared to create more crop fields.

I would skip morality considerations if animals were killed on my behalf just because they wanted some of the food that I claim. Besides, those are not eaten/used, just left to rot.

r1ghtw1ng
12-17-2012, 11:49 AM
I think we'll see more politicians throw us under the bus, and other NRA members, gun owners, etc. The emotional response to these tragedies is extremely strong. People will throw at least some gun rights in the bin to avoid being labeled callous or pro-violence after this. You're going to see lots of people kicking AWs to the curb after this.

I agree. As an olive branch, I will offer up bayo lugs, which are near and dear to my heart.

tiki
12-17-2012, 11:51 AM
This country has a short term memory. In 2 weeks, everyone will be talking about the fiscal cliff again and the rise in taxes next year. We are 2 years until mid term elections. We'll have dialog now but pretty soon we'll be 1 year from elections again.

durandal
12-17-2012, 11:51 AM
“We’ve got to find a way to create a society in which those closest to people in trouble, mentally, acknowledge that” and help them secure assistance.

We used to have a society that did that. The "assistance" they secured was called being commited to an insane asylum, aka a psychiatric treatment facility.

What happens now when someone tries to "secure assistance" is they call the police. The police come, take a complaint, and drive away, often leaving the person "needing assistance" right where they started, in the home, with frightened family members in danger.

We used to keep the dangerous psychotic individuals under lock and key, with nurses on hand to ensure that they were regularly medicated. Then the liberals saw that while they were medicated they were not a danger, so they decided to let them out on the street with a perscription for their anti-psychotic drugs, and a stern warning of "Be sure you take your meds every day!"

Seems to be working great, not ya think! :rolleyes:

Exactly.

kaligaran
12-17-2012, 12:14 PM
Yet your diet kills orders of magnitude more animals, including all the mammals competing for your food, loss of habitat, etc. There is virtually zero footprint on environment from regulated hunting, while rain forest is being cleared to create more crop fields.

I would skip morality considerations if animals were killed on my behalf just because they wanted some of the food that I claim. Besides, those are not eaten/used, just left to rot.

You TOTALLY missed my point. lol

press1280
12-17-2012, 12:56 PM
It is suprising coming from him since he sponsored a National Reciprocity bill this year.

battleship
12-17-2012, 1:03 PM
This guy disgusts me as well as the entire panel.
Babbling on about his hunting as if just hunting rifles would change the outcome of what happened. Idiot.

formerTexan
12-17-2012, 1:04 PM
Has Harry Reid said anything? He's the one that controls what comes to a Senate floor vote. All this "posturing" from the usual suspects (feinswein, upchuck schumer, durka durbin), and some surprising ones, like Manchin, is worth nothing if Reid is not with the program. I suspect 0bama0 is "discussing" with Reid and other dem Senate "leaders" on what they're going to do.

tcrpe
12-17-2012, 1:06 PM
Has Harry Reid said anything? He's the one that controls what comes to a Senate floor vote. All this "posturing" from the usual suspects (feinswein, upchuck schumer, durka durbin), and some surprising ones, like Manchin, is worth nothing if Reid is not with the program. I suspect 0bama0 is "discussing" with Reid and other dem Senate "leaders" on what they're going to do.


He has:

“In the coming days and weeks, we’ll engage in a meaningful conversation and thoughtful debate about how to change laws in a culture that allows this violence to continue to grow,” Reid said on the Senate floor. “We have no greater responsibility than keeping our most vulnerable and most precious resource — our children — safe.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/harry-reid-opens-door-to-senate-gun-control-debate-85188.html#ixzz2FLiv5pql

IVC
12-17-2012, 1:14 PM
You TOTALLY missed my point. lol

I intentionally avoided the MAIN point you made and addressed your SECONDARY point, which I find to be as offensive as the linkage of 2A to hunting (where we both agree it is completely wrong.)

Guntech
12-17-2012, 1:18 PM
I think we'll see more politicians throw us under the bus, and other NRA members, gun owners, etc. The emotional response to these tragedies is extremely strong. People will throw at least some gun rights in the bin to avoid being labeled callous or pro-violence after this. You're going to see lots of people kicking AWs to the curb after this.

If you change where you stand because your beliefs were shaken you never truly believe in anything. If you never walk through fire you will never know what really matters anyway.

nicki
12-17-2012, 1:28 PM
For America to embrace a ban on guns would mean that Americans would have to accept that the marijuana prohibition works. I bring this up because public opinion is shifting against the war on drugs,

What we be different with a war on guns?

Our mental health system is broken, alternative and natural based medicines that help with various medical conditions are being suppressed to enrich crony capitalists at the expense of our children.

Frankly we should wage a public relations war against the medical establishment and the pharmacy industry because they share as large responsibility in creating these socio-path monsters.

Guns may be the tools they use, but just about everyone of those shooters had mental health issues, almost all of them were on various psych meds and one of the side effects from this meds are personality disorders.

Those meds alter people's though processes and how they behave in the process.
Meds that make people feel homicidal or suicidal will create problems if those folks have guns.

Many of these shooters were highly intelligent, the Colorado shooter had his house rigged to blow and they knew enough to plan their swan songs in gun free target rich environments.

Rather than taking a defensive position on gun riots, we should be on offense laying the blame squarely where it belongs.

Nicki

formerTexan
12-17-2012, 1:34 PM
He has:

Thanks. I'm thinking 50% chance that a bill may get out of the Senate that is bad, but I have to think positively that the House will be the place these idiotic bills die.

The politico article has a nice slant though, Reid did not say anything about guns specifically, but if you glance at the title and didn't finish reading the whole article, it sure sounds like he did.

So there will be talking and discussion about what to do, now its the time to force the "narrative" makers to talk more about mental health issues, and how to support people who have children/relatives who need help, rather than banning inanimate objects.

tcrpe
12-17-2012, 1:39 PM
For America to embrace a ban on guns would mean that Americans would have to accept that the marijuana prohibition works. I bring this up because public opinion is shifting against the war on drugs,



IBTPH

vantec08
12-17-2012, 1:43 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9751588/Connecticut-school-shooting-two-US-Senators-call-for-assault-weapons-ban.html


The two Senators – both Democrats but with "A" ratings and previous endorsements from the powerful National Rifle Association gun lobby group – both spoke out to argue publicly that the death of 20 Year 2 children was a "game-changing" moment for America's divisive gun debate.

tcrpe
12-17-2012, 1:49 PM
IBTDN

Glock22Fan
12-17-2012, 1:51 PM
If you change where you stand because your beliefs were shaken you never truly believe in anything. If you never walk through fire you will never know what really matters anyway.

Would this apply to a gun-grabber who suddenly saw the light after his daughter was saved from rape by a passing CCW holder?

Did it apply to Paul on the road to Damascus?

formerTexan
12-17-2012, 2:25 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9751588/Connecticut-school-shooting-two-US-Senators-call-for-assault-weapons-ban.html


The two Senators – both Democrats but with "A" ratings and previous endorsements from the powerful National Rifle Association gun lobby group – both spoke out to argue publicly that the death of 20 Year 2 children was a "game-changing" moment for America's divisive gun debate.

Warner is from VA, and he has tight line to toe, between those libtards in NoVa, and the rural/suburbs democrats. He was non-specific according to this:
http://wtvr.com/2012/12/17/mark-warner-on-gun-control-laws/
But the "even if we save a few lives" line could prove to be a bad sign.

I like how the title again is extremely misleading, Warner said nothing about a ban. For all we know, he could be thinking about getting mental health records into NICS.

Is it time to bust out electoral style maps or counts, except this time the counts are:
1. solid anti self defense
2. leans anti self defense
3. leans pro self defense
4. solid self defense

morfeeis
12-17-2012, 2:44 PM
Problem is, the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING TO DO WITH HUNTING!
No one cares about your logic.

It looks like he turned under pressure.

morfeeis
12-17-2012, 2:44 PM
Problem is, the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING TO DO WITH HUNTING!
No one cares about your logic.

It looks like he turned under pressure.

tcrpe
12-17-2012, 2:57 PM
Did it apply to Paul on the road to Damascus?

Ron Paul?

sholling
12-17-2012, 3:36 PM
The media (including Fox News) smell blood and are convinced that they now have the momentum to ram through a renewed and permanent AWB and they may just pull it off. One thing is for sure they won't back off with the smell of victory for disarmament in the air. The media pressure has NRA "A" rated Democrat congress critters racing with squishy Republicans to do something about guns. Nobody will talk about arming teachers or ending legally mandated victim disarmament zones because the media will go ape on them.

If you value your rights and are not yet an NRA member it's time to join so they have the financial resources to do what they do best and pressure politicians. At the same time you need to write your congress critters now because our rights are in the balance and it could go either way. We also need to put enough pressure on the few conservative media outlets and politely let them know what we think of them going squishy on the 2nd Amendment.

IVC
12-17-2012, 4:04 PM
The media (including Fox News) smell blood and are convinced that they now have the momentum to ram through a renewed and permanent AWB and they may just pull it off.

Even if they do, will it stick in the post Heller world? Courts don't follow mass hysteria...

sandman21
12-17-2012, 4:16 PM
They don't.... how did that work out for the commerce clause?

vantec08
12-17-2012, 4:16 PM
Even if they do, will it stick in the post Heller world? Courts don't follow mass hysteria...

the courts . . .. . as presently constituted. That may change.

sholling
12-17-2012, 4:19 PM
Even if they do, will it stick in the post Heller world? Courts don't follow mass hysteria...
Yes they sometimes do. In this case it's a whole lot easier to keep our rights by leaning on politicians than it is to get 5 justices to stand up for mean looking guns and full sized magazines.

IVC
12-17-2012, 5:18 PM
Agree completely.

The Heller decision changes the balance, though, where the legislators have to think whether it's prudent to test the waters with the current composition of the court and get the ruling once and for all. It might not end the way they'd like it to.

The SCOTUS route is a meaningful deterrent that will be made very clear to all of the legislators who end up pushing for this law. All they need to be told is that the rabidly anti gun mayor Daley was instrumental in getting us McDonald. If they push in spite of the risks, there might be a silver lining in it for us.