Sen. Jim Inhofe says remarks on Newtown families misrepresented

Tulsa World ^ | Apr 11, 2013, at 2:03 AM Updated on 4/11 at 1:43 PM | RANDY KREHBIEL

[Red Steel]

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., responded Wednesday to criticism of remarks he made Tuesday about the Senate's background check bill.

"I think it's so unfair of the administration to hurt these families, to make them think this has something to do with them when, in fact, it doesn't," Inhofe told the Huffington Post on Tuesday in regard to families of those killed in the Connecticut school massacre.

Later, on his Facebook page, Inhofe said his remarks were misrepresented.

"My heart goes out to those who lost loved ones during the tragedy in Newtown," he wrote. "I am even more saddened that the President and the liberal press are using these families to leverage a bill in the Senate that would not have prevented their horrible loss.

"It is widely known that Adam Lanza stole the weapons his mother legally purchased and owned. Nancy Lanza complied with all federal and state laws when purchasing her firearms, and furthermore, nothing in S. 649 would have prevented her from purchasing these weapons.

"We must remember that S. 649 is about gun control, and not gun violence. Injecting these mourning families into the debate on a bill that wouldn't change the outcome of this horrible tragedy is indefensible."

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who earlier worked with other senators on a background check bill, said a Wednesday bipartisan proposal is "a good faith but unworkable plan."

Coburn said it imposes "new taxes and unreasonable burdens" on citizens and "prioritizes collecting records over protecting citizens."

"This is the wrong approach," said Coburn. "Preventing sales to dangerous persons, not collecting receipts, will save lives."

Coburn said more emphasis should have been given to improving access to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and he predicted that the current proposal will be "extremely difficult" to get through Congress.

"I entered these talks because I believe the American people want a common-sense policy that respects their Second Amendment rights and freedoms while giving them the tools they need to make sure they aren't transferring a firearm to someone who will be a threat to themselves or others," said Coburn.

[ozzymandus]

Gee, what's wrong with exploiting grieving parents to advance your leftist agenda? It's a time-tested RAT tactic once known as “Waving the bloody shirt”. Mr Gabby Giffords is using it as a career.

[onyx]

I’m sick of hearing about Sandy Hook and Newtown.

[John O]

I see nothing in the Constitution that lets them deny a weapon to anyone who is a citizen. “Shall not be infringed” is pretty broad.

[jaunpaz]

To interpret the constitution one does not read what it says, but rather what a common sense liberal wishes it said. It doesn’t take a law degree to see what the second amd. says, what the dependant clause is, but an inteligent liberal can see that when reality fails wishful thinking is much better. We no lomger have a constitution. What we have is a wish list.

[sagar]

“I’m sick of hearing about Sandy Hook and Newtown.”

Finally! Somebody said what I was thinking. These newtown morons have it all wrong... it is their job to protect their children. If they want their children from being shot at, form a coalition and protect their schools. These morons want to disarm law abiding citizens.