Posted on 04/10/2013 4:37:40 PM PDT by forty_years
Urgent action required. It is urgent that every gun owner call their Senators today and demand that they oppose the "See a Shrink, Lose your Guns" sell-out bill that is being authored by Senators Pat Toomey (R) and Joe Manchin (D) - but which also has Chuck Schumer's fingerprints all over it. Call senators immediately at 202-224-3121 and click here to send pre-written or free-form emails to senators about the Toomey/Manchin "compromise" (scroll to bottom to send).
See a Shrink, Lose your Guns. The anti-gun "ranters" have spent the last week telling us that Republican Senators can't filibuster Harry Reid's gun control bill; that they can't cut off debate to a bill they haven't seen yet. "Let the bill come up," they say. "We need to see the bill" before Senators can vote against cloture to proceed to it.
Well, we've seen the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer sell-out, and it's worse than the Feinstein gun ban, which will reportedly be tied to it and offered simultaneously in a Senate procedure known as an "amendment tree."
Toomey and Manchin will claim that their bill only covers "gun show sales" and Internet sales. But if you've ever talked about your gun and /or let it be known you'd like to sell or buy a gun on the Internet, this language covers you. If you advertise your gun in the church bulletin and the bulletin is put on the Internet, you're covered.
The only exemption is for sales that are sold exclusively by word of mouth. The increased number of background checks would likely exacerbate the system breakdowns (inherent to NICS) which have shut down gun shows over and over again. It would mean that Americans who were illegally denied firearms because their names were similar to other people's would effectively be barred from owning a gun. (We would never tolerate such delays for voting rights or other freedoms that we are guaranteed.)
And for those Republicans who think they're going to be able to offer their useless amendments, guess what? Reid is reportedly going to use a procedure to block out all amendments (called an "amendment tree"). And there are plenty of Senators standing in line to make sure that the Senate doesn't give "unanimous consent" to let those Republicans offer their amendments.
So if you live in a rural area, you're effectively barred from selling or buying a gun - or it at least becomes very, very difficult.
Incidentally, the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer "national registry" language is full of holes. There will be a national gun registry as a result of this sell-out.
But that's not the worst part. Under an amendment in the bill to HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), you could have your guns taken away because your private shrink thinks you're "dangerous" and could send your name directly to the FBI Instant Check system.
Did you think it was terrible that 150,000 military veterans had been added into the NICS system because they'd seen a VA shrink about their PTSD? Well guess what? Now it's going to happen to the rest of the population ... by the millions!
And the next step, of course, will be to begin to sue psychiatrists that don't send every single patient's name to the Instant Check system, and to make sure that their lives are ruined if they don't send a patient to NICS and anything goes wrong.
The bottom line: "See a shrink; lose your guns."
All of this will reportedly be on an amendment tree with the Feinstein gun ban and magazine bans.
Repeal of gun owner protections. In addition, Toomey no doubt unintentionally agreed to repeal one of the most important protections for gun owners that was included in the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Act - the provision that would allow you to take an unloaded, locked-up gun through states like New York without being stopped. Under a new subsection (c), the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer bill would require you to "demonstrate" to the satisfaction of New York police where you were coming from and where you are going to. And, if you don't do that to their satisfaction, they can arrest you.
Please keep in mind, nothing in this bill would have stopped Newtown dirtbag from killing his mother and taking the firearms that she owned and perpetrating the horrible crimes that he committed.
Nothing is this bill would actually make children safer at schools. There is nothing that will actually keep bad guys from stealing or illegally acquiring guns, but there's plenty that will threaten our gun rights!
ACTION: Contact your two senators immediately. Tell them the "see a shrink; lose your guns" sellout is even worse than the Feinstein gun ban which will reportedly be on the same amendment tree with it. Distribute this alert far and wide.
Time is short, so if you call - at 202-224-3121 - you may click below to see the pre-written letter and use the contents to help direct your comments.
Click here to send your Senators a prewritten email message (scroll to bottom to send).
Technically there is no final bill as the amendment process is coming yet its interesting that this Dem points out that he is not committing either way till he reads the bills to be voted on implying he has not seen any yet.
This is after one group committing to oppose ANYTHING followed by another GOP group committing to support ANYTHING in cloture.
the sleight of hand that can happen today, and then we are stuck with whatever the definition of 'is' is...
i feel better already...
wtf about "shall NOT be infringed" is so hard to understand with these pols ???
better yet, everytime a 'new' gun grab bill is talked about, why dont we see 5 or 10 proposed gunlaw REPEAL bills moved forward by some 'A' rated pol ???
is always a compromise down the slope to more control and less freedom...
Because gun laws that specific voters dont see as directly impacting themselves or anyone they know that seem to might do some good (”If ony one shooting is prevented...’) are very popular.
Expnding background checks and limiting clips are both as most people dont seem themselves every being hurt by them.
And those who must be elected dont ignore polls.
Many freepers here have been posting that Toomey is toast and then this Morning Joe said Toomey will win re-election in landslide and will brush away a primary opponent. This one will be interesting to watch.
Well it is indeed a weapon for them. What they feel about newtown individually or collectivelky is irrelevant. They have stated they want legislation as a result of Newtown in order to prevent these tragedies from happening. Therefore we should make them prove how their legislation prevents another Newtown.
Specter did not run in the 2010 Republican primary; he switched parties in 2009 and lost the 2010 Democrat nomination. Surely, Santorum wasn’t backing him in the Democratic primary.
Do you have any proof of that? Cornyn was certainly backing Specter and Sestak over Toomey, even though he wasn't announcing such publicly.
Read post 49, that is what it says, Santorum was supporting him in 2009 for the 2010 cycle before he switched parties, then Specter gave back the $5,000.00.
Santorum was a lifelong devotee of Specter, Arlen Specter was also supported by, endorsed by, and campaigned for, by Santorum during Specter’s 1996 Presidential run to make the GOP a pro-abortion party.
“”Specter was up for re-election to the Senate in 2010, and expressed his plans to run again. On March 18, 2009, Specter said that he was not considering running as an independent. He said, “To eliminate any doubt, I am a Republican, and I am running for reelection in 2010 as a Republican on the Republican ticket.” Subsequently Specter’s 2004 conservative GOP primary challenger, Pat Toomey, announced he would again run for the Republican nomination in the Republican senatorial primary.
However, on April 28, 2009, Specter stated that “As the Republican Party has moved farther and farther to the right, I have found myself increasingly at odds with the Republican philosophy and more in line with the philosophy of the Democratic Party.” He said that he was switching party affiliation and would run as a Democrat in the 2010 election.””
” My personal view is to save ammunition for the real battle : amnesty and path to citizenship. This is the big one. I am saving my $#%#@ for that and them on that. Give illegals the vote and they lose me completely. “
The battle that trumps all others.
I bet these GOP fools are NOT willing to add a immigration status (illegals) check to this evolving background Gun bill.
But then even illegals got 2nd amendment rights here as soon as they cross the border, it sounds like they think (came from above) .
That way they can claim we cant round them up because they loaded up on guns.
Good point.
I'd put it a little differently, that his innate I-wanna-be-in-The-Cool-Club RiNO finally broke cover, and now he's out in the open.
The Pew Sociology Survey warned us about these guys nearly 15 years ago: on 2A issues, they've got "CAVE" written all over them. They're the closest thing we've got to English country squires and snobbish toffs.
Toomey stuck it to us...F***ing pos.
If I’d wanted Bob Casey Part II, I would have voted for Bob Casey...
What a piece of garbage.
RE NRA:
Could be disinformatziya.
Yes, I must admit I wasn't there.
I heard an update on this. Its that while the NRA was closely involved with the creation of the Toomey amendment they now have re-instated their opposition to background checks meaning any bill. The bill can still be filibustered after amendments and they may push for that.
This way they (NRA) still try to defeat the bill but if it passes anyway they have weakened it with the Toomy.
If this is true then you wont see the NRA go after Toomey at election time.
The idea situation is what Perdogg thinks will happen, that it dies at the end after multiple amendments turn off Senators to it, after getting hopes up. (also it could be most risky)
I am watching closely to see how it plays out, no crystal ball on this one for SOL..
I forgot, we still got Bohner as a last ditch defense.
He is has nerves of steel when it comes to these tough situations.
Paul Ryan too,.
Nothing to worry about.
” I am watching closely to see how it plays out, no crystal ball on this one for SOL.. “
It would be impossible to call. One thing I have learned the past few years, is that we can’t trust in ANY Republican anymore.
” I forgot, we still got Bohner as a last ditch defense.
He is has nerves of steel when it comes to these tough situations.”
Thanks for the morning chortle : )
Lord save us from rich RINOs. Ironically, the liberals think the rich are evil, and indeed they are. Many of them are decadent liberals.
People who really are decadent aren’t really liberal, if you think about it. Liberals (old school, pre-WWI) used to have “morals” and stuff.
Like President George Bush the elder. He was a disastrous tax-hiker and hyper-regulator (disabilities act). But he always had class and integrity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.