0

Gun bill defeat a win for big business

Letter to the editor

The defeat of the gun bill on Wednesday has some similarities to a bill that passed in Georgia some years back. The commonsense gun bill would have required background checks for sale of guns on the Internet and required all dealers to give background checks at gun shows. The gun bill would also make it a felony to any agency that developed a gun registry. With over 90 percent approval from the public agreeing with the bill, it was defeated in the Senate. It was defeated primarily because of a filibuster waged by Senate Republicans and a few Democrats, which made it an requirement for a 60-vote approval instead of the usual 51 votes.

Those that opposed this bill may be dancing in the streets, but they shouldn’t tango too long. If the opposition of this bill would look at the overall process of our lawmakers, they would notice a very unsettling priority between the people and big business (in this case the gun manufacturers).

Years ago, Georgia had a big fight over changing the state flag. The majority of the public wanted no change in the state flag, but lawmakers on both sides under pressure by big business and commerce agencies forced the state flag change. The governor signed the bill for the flag change, but despite an outcry from the public it was your local lawmakers that sided with big business. (Later on, you were promised a ballot vote. How did that turn out?)

For those that are paranoid about the feds busting down your door for your guns, please consider how with 90 percent approval for background checks, the bill was defeated. The real fight isn’t guns, abortion or taxes; it’s your voice.

A storm does not discriminate and lawmakers don’t discriminate when it comes to their personal survival and advantage.

TONY WRIGHT

Albany

Comments

Pappa 1 year, 5 months ago

After Obamacare, I do not trust any new legislation. I had to drop my coverage and am wandering how to continue to cover my children with premiums expected to increase 80% in 2014. Did you read the bill? All they want is a list of names of lawful gun owners and complete control. The founding fathers wrote the 2nd amendment because they knew this day would come.

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

Obviously reading the bill and comprehension of the bill is two different items. Also having mental thoughts as to what the writers of the 2nd amendment intened is an added feature. You are in tough place since you don't trust any "new" legistation and dropped your coverage on an "expected" increase. Hopefully things will get better for your family.

0

B4it 1 year, 5 months ago

It's pretty simple. Obama and his admin CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!! Can't be trusted with gun ownership information. Can't be trusted to come up with an acceptable yearly budget. Can't be trusted to spend tax revenues wisely = gives billions/millions to Egypt and other countries who hate us. Can't be trusted to present an accurate description of the Health Care law = it was a TAX even though they said it was not. Can't be trusted to provide the facts about Bengazi. Can't be trusted to tell the truth = said there would be no tax increases for anyone making under $250,000. And I am sure there are many more facts that others can add to this list.

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

You used the trust 7 times, so I guess you have a distrust for this President and his adminstration. The good part may be that you didn't include the rest of the federal government (Senate or the House of Reps). Otherwise you would know that your tax dollars have been going to countries that "hate" for over 50 years. Yet it is curious that when natural disasters happens Obama haters (not you) welcome help from that same distrustful adminstration. Curious?

0

ittybittyme 1 year, 5 months ago

Where did you get that 90% number regarding thar the public approved of that gun bill that did not pass? I know of no one who approved of that gun bill. It is not about my voice it is totally about my guns, Tony. Wake up and stop drinking the Koolaid.

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

Polling is the 'new' way most media outlets use to gage where the public is on the different subjects. You may find some polls that agree with your views. If you are a person that is very diverse in meeting people then you should run into a few people that have a different view on this subject. And maybe you can influence others to think outside of their box since it shouldn't be of any surpise that other people have different views that must be respected. But you already knew this.

0

FryarTuk 1 year, 5 months ago

CBS NEWS/NEW YORK TIMES POLLFor release: Thursday, January 17, 20137:00 am (nationwide poll):

Background Checks on All Potential Gun Buyers: Favor 92% Oppose 7

0

Abytaxpayer 1 year, 5 months ago

Sheepeople will believe anything. Tony try buying a gun from any US gun dealer and getting it to your house without it being registered and a background check. And just where was this 90% that wanted Universal Background Checks? Maybe a selected little group of say 200 people. What were your thoughts on background checks before your government started telling you 90% wanted their law to control law abiding citizens but not the criminals? Did you look at the law or just jump on the band wagon because 90% must be right and you were clueless? Sheepeople will go along to get along because asking questions might upset someone.

1

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

Finally, a reply that makes sense. No, I didn't jump on any bandwagon. I'm a Dallas Cowboys and Los Angeles Lakers fan when they win or lose,lol. First, the polls were mainly from the media and private polling companies. If I had my way ALL gun owners would have to register their guns (including me). And like auto and home ownership there would be a database on all transactions. If the meaning of "sheeppeople" is defined by going along with the majority then we should include church goers, tax payers, showing patriotism and don't forget the 'majority' that hate Obamacare.

0

FryarTuk 1 year, 5 months ago

It's a win for the subculture of violence in this country. The second amendment is considerably endangered by the fostering of extremism and lack of understanding by the likes of Wayne LaPierre (who hijacked the NRA) and fringe organizations. With 90% of American adults nationwide favoring more extensive background checks, it will come. Reason and light will ultimately see through the darkness. The real issue is the extremists continue to marginalize the importance of the second amendment so that Americans become disinterested in gun ownership at all. The trend of gun ownership clearly substantiates the reality.

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

It's sad that people WITH guns are so paranoid about their safety. Yet no matter how many guns we have, we can't protect our children at the movies or the mall if we are on a fishing trip, at work or working on our car. So why be against a law that would require all gun purchases to have better background check. Certainly some on this page would change their mind about this is law if a terrorist purchased a gun online and kills a family member. But it is the old thinking that 'if it is not happening to me, then leave it alone'. Many of the Newtown children were dismembered in the shooting, c'mon people start caring beyond yourself.

0

B4it 1 year, 5 months ago

QUIK... It is also just as sad that you refer to a gun owner as "paranoid about their safety". This is not only short sighted, but also shows your general lack of understanding about this whole issue. You are only using your emotions to try to formulate a law/policy, and that is always a bad idea.

It is indeed a horrible event when innocent adults and children are killed by the "mentally impaired" who have no respect for human life. However, it was not the type of weapon used that should be mindlessly refered to for being banned. Innocent people have been needlessly killed for centuries by those who do not respect human life. And there are many tools that have been used to do this killing (swords, cars, knives, bats, poison substances, bombs, even doctors performing abortions, etc, etc, etc,).

Background checks have been in effect for many types of gun purchases for years. Special licenses and background checks are also already required for fully automatic weapons. The issue is how many criminals have been prosecuted for failing this background check when trying to purchase a gun? So why are more laws needed when the ones we already have are not being enforced? The AG has already stated they did not have the resources to pursue these cases. This admin has a hidden agenda and many are being too gullible. The other issue for me is that I DO NOT TRUST this current administration to have anymore personal information. They have proven themselves to be untrustworthy!!!

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

It was a good try, but - if you are going to quote someone then quote them. I said " For those that are paranoid" meaning there are parnoid gun owners like they are parnoid advocates for gun control. For some people they are dogmatic on everything (there is no gray area) and normally I don't write to them or respond to their comments (not meaning you but anyone who can't debate without attacking). Most of the arguments of my writings want to side track MY subject and I say to them WRITE YOUR OPINION and see how people will side track your subject.

0

Nous_Defions 1 year, 5 months ago

"Certainly some on this page would change their mind about this is law if a terrorist purchased a gun online and kills a family member."

There is no truth in the above quote. You can order a firearm online but it must be shipped to a Federal Firearm Licensee (FFL) which is a gun shop and before you take possession a NCIS background check must be done. That's been the Law since 1992. So what's the difference between purchasing "online", or purchasing one on display at a FFL, or purchasing one from a friend, or stealing one in a burglary. All are legal except for the last (burglary). Laws are only obeyed by the Law Abiding.not those that have evil in their hearts. If evil is your intent you will find a way to do harm (have you forgot Boston so soon?), why shouldn't we make a law against evil, Tony?

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

So what you are saying towards my quote - that NO ONE would change their mind and that the word some meaning 1, 2 or 3 people would not change their mind if a terrorist purchased a gun online. Amazing that you feel that confident about every person in this country! I guess then you believe everyone is dogmatic in the same view you have. I suggest if you have not - start traveling across this country and overseas in the next ten years.

0

Nous_Defions 1 year, 5 months ago

Mr. Wright, read AND comprehend my post above. NO ONE can purchase a gun online and take possession of it without a NCIS check!! There is no ambiguity in my post. Your statement is not truthful.

A fellow by the name of George Orwell once said: "Political language . . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind."

0

waltspecht 1 year, 5 months ago

legally we cannot prosecute a felon for not filling out the required paperwork when purchasing a firearm. It would be a violation of their fourth amendment rights against self incrimination. So the only ones this universal background checks would impact would be honest citizens. Plus, there is no way you are going to stop a determined Felon from obtaining a firearm if they really want one. Recently, the White Supremist that was killed in Texas, and is suspected of killing the Colorado Prisons Chief got his girlfriend to buy the weapon and turn it over to him. She is now in some limited degree of trouble, but not charged as an accomplise to murder as she should be. As to internet sales, they do go through an FFL dealer at the receiving persons end of the sale. There is so much misinformation out there, people might just want to read the Laws so they know they aren't being fed a lomp of excrement.

0

FryarTuk 1 year, 5 months ago

Walt says: "legally we cannot prosecute a felon for not filling out the required paperwork when purchasing a firearm. It would be a violation of their fourth amendment rights against self incrimination."

Walt, a felon cannot purchase a gun with or without paperwork. He/she can certainly be prosecuted for possession and I think for purchasing/attempting purchase as well. In many of the arrests made in ABY felon in possession is an appended charge.

0

Jacob 1 year, 5 months ago

You are correct. If they fill out the paperwork and lie about their felony convicition, they can be prosecuted. They are almost never, but they can be.

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

Yes you are right "we" can't prosecute a felon for not filling out the required paperwork BUT a prosecutor can file charges FOR possessing a gun. If you find time (because I'M busy writing my next opinion on gun control) could you ask those that agree with you in their replies on my subject - name at least 3 laws that are NOT VIOLATED by anyone. There is a trend in most of the replies saying - this law would stop ANY criminal from purchasing a gun. I really don't mind people in this area of the country from disagreeing with me, in fact I expect it. The real truth is, I believe it's only a matter of time when stronger gun laws will pass. If you don't believe me, pause for a moment and say to yourself - since my birth, do I have more privacy or less? Follow the trend whether you like it or not, thousands of laws are passed each year. Have a nice day.

0

Nous_Defions 1 year, 5 months ago

Mr. Wright, before you post your next opinion on gun control, would you mind researching the current State and National laws regarding firearms. I would suggest the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms website and Handgunlaw.us. Your previous posts are devoid of knowledge concerning firearms and the laws regulating them. As an rabid Hoplophobe (meaning a fear of weapons and those who possess them) you should use some basic military strategy which is; to gather intelligence on the enemy in order to find his weaknesses. Good luck with that!

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

I will take your advice when you tell what school of mind reading you attended that convinced you that fear is in my writing. Last time I checked anyone who has a strong viewpoint may not be fearful but just have a strong viewpoint like you SEEM to have.

0

waltspecht 1 year, 5 months ago

When is the last time you saw any Felon in Possession of a gun convicted under the Federal Statute that requires a mandatory ten year sentance? How often is this charge plea bargined away on the local level, and refused to prosecute on the Federal level. Until there are real teeth in the outcome, Felons will have guns.

0

AnotherMom 1 year, 5 months ago

Quik, could you please answer a question for me? How would new gun laws (such as the ones recently defeated) prevent another incident like that at New Town?

0

QUIK 1 year, 5 months ago

Good question. I doubt the recent defeated law would have prevented the killing of babies. A question for you. Do you think in the near future (5 years) there will be any mass killing from someone who didn't have a background check for the weapon they use? As a side note: do think someone's child would have stand a better chance of living if the shooter had only a magazine that holds ten rounds instead of thirty? Thanks for the question.

0

Nous_Defions 1 year, 5 months ago

Mr. Wright, before you post your next opinion on gun control, would you mind researching the current State and National laws regarding firearms. I would suggest the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms website and Handgunlaw.us. Your previous posts are devoid of knowledge concerning firearms and the laws regulating them. As an rabid Hoplophobe (meaning a fear of weapons and those who possess them) you should use some basic military strategy which is; to gather intelligence on the enemy in order to find his weaknesses. Good luck with that!

0

Sign in to comment