Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Flaws in gun-related legislation

March 13, 2014

West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin reportedly has some reservations about gun-related legislation sent to him for his signature. He should be concerned....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(33)

TopGun

Mar-21-14 6:47 AM

Maybe a good portion of the 80,000 that were denied came from the wrong political party. It's being investigated right now that there were people denied disability due to their affiliation with the wrong political party. We already know voters were targeted by this administration because they were Republicans, so why would Obama overlook an opportunity to mess with a person's disability. After all, when he throws one of his temper tantrums, he always goes after the elderly and our veterans in retaliation. We would be naïve to think he's stop with them.

I doubt there's more than a small number of criminals that go through the background check knowing they may give away their location, or hoping they will fall through the cracks and get approved. They'll buy off the streets rather than chance being jailed for trying to purchase a gun while on parole. Doesn't seem likely.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rangerover

Mar-19-14 12:18 PM

Too bad there are no laws for the criminal element to follow. The honest law abiding citizen who has never been arrested and causes not a ripple in civil disobedience has to pay and pay dearly not only with dollars but with being looked down upon because we may own a certain firearm with cosmetic features of semi-auto military design,a Remington semi-auto loading deer hunting rifle vs an AR-15, only cosmetics are different as we both know. I hope the NRA never caves to any compromise or "good deal" from the anti gun lobby, once the camel's nose is in the tent, the whole body will be next, never give an inch they will take not the yard, but the mile....disarmament of our citizens and abolish of the Second Amendment.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rangerover

Mar-19-14 11:52 AM

TopGun that's what I'm talking about who in this country trust's this government when they spy on all of us, not that I need to worry too much about it like with NSA all that they gather on emails, facebook or any web site we visit and post comments. Yea I do believe in all probability they know what guns were purchased even though the law says they can't. The are only a few states that come to mind on registering guns Hawaii and Maryland, Maryland especially if you move to from another state you must register all guns. NJ and NY handguns all and California who knows they have so many banned guns and terrible laws. There were over 80,000 who applied to purchase who were denied like I said previous and only a few (44) ever prosecuted up to 2012. Maybe that 80,000 is proof that the back ground check system is working, I don't know. There is an appeal direction one can go in if they feel they were unjustly denied.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-18-14 6:39 AM

We've been told the BATF and the FBI doesn't keep records of the background checks, but who's to say they don't? I can't see them passing up an excellent opportunity to keep records on the people purchasing firearms. While they may not know exactly what firearm you're purchasing, they do know if it's a handgun or rifle. That's asked when the dealer does the check.

Now, here's the million dollar question. How many criminals do you know who are stupid enough to try to purchase a firearm knowing they will fail the background check? Given that, who are the ones being subjected to criminal background checks? Anyone? Ah, honest, law abiding citizens. So I ask you, what good are the checks? It's like polling a select group of people over and over. You will always get the same answer. It won't be effective, but the numbers look good.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-16-14 3:22 PM

Range, actually, your guns are registered yet, even though you filled out the people at the gun shop. Gun dealers aren't required to send those document to the BATF unless called for. So they do not know who bought what as long as those documents are still in the hands of the gun dealer.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rangerover

Mar-16-14 12:45 PM

This whole thing of allowing or not allowing law abiding citizens from carrying concealed at after school recreational activities.

Oh I'm sure the criminal element loves these laws of "gun free zones", they know they have a better chance of completing their "activities" with a better chance of them being the only one armed. Does "drug free school zones" stop the smaller drug dealers from selling drugs in school zones, of course not albeit guns in the hands of the criminal element will have the same effect, the criminal element have no laws, no parameters, no rules. It's good to have law abiding citizens carry concealed anyplace, again the element of surprise. Gun Free Zones only enhance and make the armed criminal element feel "secure and confident" he will get what he wants and get away when everyone else ducks and runs.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rangerover

Mar-16-14 11:53 AM

You register your car. You register your phone. "Confiscation"

Are you kidding or what, my guns are all registered with the dealer when I purchased. Register a telephone? You can buy throw aways at Walmart without the phone company knowing anything about the person who purchased, even his or her name. Confiscation like what they are planning in Connecticut with so called "assault weapons" for those who registered them ? Or the fiasco when the registered firearm becomes public records for the anti-gun crowd to get hold of like last year in NY State and post your name, address, house picture and telephone # on facebook or the web, no thank you. Conceal Carry is great, nobody knows who's armed or not, surprise has it's positive elements when confronted by someone*****bent on doing you harm. For those using cell phones for defense, like "I'll call the cops", make sure your battery is charged at all times, the cops show up 10 minutes later and the perp long

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rangerover

Mar-16-14 11:40 AM

One more thing. I just recently purchased a hand gun here in West Virginia, just this pass week. It actually took me longer to fill out the form and read and answer the questions than it did for the dealer to get an answer when he called in the NICS check. There is a bill sent to the Fed's passed earlier this year (2014) in both houses of West Virginia's legislature that would exempt those who have CC permits from future background checks when purchasing firearms. House Bill 4186

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rangerover

Mar-16-14 11:04 AM

As far as "concealed carry" in West Virginia in public recreation facilities, how many times have we heard someone say in other states "if only I had my firearm on my person" when they could have stopped a "crazy" mentally unstable gunman commit his ugly massacre of innocent people. Yes you can ban guns tomorrow, but 100 years from now there still will be the crazies out there doing their dirty one way or another. Thank the ACLU for cleaning out the Asylums and the Psychiatrist's for the administering of drug therapy that allows those who should be committed to roam the streets, the Col movie theater shooter and Sandy Hook shooter both were on meds or should have been taking their meds. But the meds themselves whether taking them or not may very well been the culprit.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rangerover

Mar-16-14 10:52 AM

Of approximately 80,000 in 2012 that were denied (a gun) because of a background check … only 44 people were prosecuted. And you want to close a "loophole" at gun shows with extended background checks. Have any of you posters been to a gun show in WV or PA in the last few years, got some news for you, even the citizen who rents a table with no FFL still use 3rd party dealers to verify the purchase of a firearm through the NICS checks. Here's a link to "politco facts" to back up my claims of more inked laws the less prosecutions. ***********politifact****/new-hampshire/statements/2013/mar/22/kelly-ayotte/most-people-trying-buy-gun-illegally-us-senator-ke/ President Obama and this administration has been the biggest marketing for firearms dealers in the history of the USA. He's sold more guns with his rhetoric than any president or paid firearms market manager ever.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-16-14 8:35 AM

The only difference between colonial days and now is the fact that there are more criminals running lose today than there were then. Why? In the colonial days, they either hanged or shot murderers and other violent criminals, instead of stuffing them in a prison cell and wasting taxpayer money on someone who will never be anything more than a criminal.

Since the left has had very little success in stopping crime, they go after law abiding citizens in order to give the illusion that their unnecessary laws are working. It doesn't matter that it's impacting the wrong people, while the criminals still go about their merry way murdering, raping and harming children.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-15-14 8:35 PM

Joe, I have NEVER found a single gun owner that agrees with closing your so called gun show loophole. Why? There is no such loophole. Individuals have every right to trade or sell guns between other individuals. Since gun shows are nothing more than a gathering place where individuals come to trade or sell guns, then no laws have been broken, therefor there is no "loophole" as you call it. They are perfectly legal. What you're shooting for is registration. Have you ever seen a mass shooting at a gun show? You won't either, which makes them more safe than our public schools. Maybe that's what irks the liberals.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-15-14 8:30 PM

Dave, the Constitution give us the right to own guns. There was no need to mention any particular gun, or what you were going to use it for. It was a forgone conclusion that if you lived in the 1700's, you would almost without exception have two specific uses for your guns, protection and food. It's no different today. We use them to get food, and protect ourselves from criminals and other dangerous individuals. If that scares you, then you may want to reevaluate where you stand in the greater scheme of things. Guns have two enemies, Liberals and Rust. We know where you stand.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-15-14 8:23 PM

AR15's are actually an excellent hunting rifle, especially those in the 308 caliber. The 223's make excellent guns for groundhogs and other small varmits. An AR15 is no different than any semi-automatic hunting rifle with the exception of holding a few more rounds.

I build my own AR's, fit them with a match grade barrel, a match trigger, a leupold scope and they are as accurate as any other hunting rifle, and as comfortable a rifle as I've ever had in my hands. You lefties should try something other than shooting off your mouth. You might actually like the shooting sports if you'd stop being such a stuffed shirt and give it a try. Target shooting teaches you self-control. Not just anyone can hit a target at 1000 yards.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Dirtman

Mar-15-14 4:23 PM

"How many of you hunt with an AR-15?"

Does the 2nd amendment say anything about hunting? I own guns, but I've never hunted. I did watch my brother blow a squirrel clean in half with a 12 gauge. It piqued my interest in guns, but not in hunting.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-14-14 9:33 PM

Hirsh, have you ever noticed that when it comes to gun related issues, the lefties are always quick to grab some kid by the scruff of the neck and jab them in your face, claiming they must be protected? However, there's one little flaw in their reasoning. We're not the ones the kids need protection from. First off, concealed carry holders have been checked out by the FBI and the local sheriff's department through a federal background check and shown to have a clean record. Second, we're not the ones doing the shootings. It's their criminal friends they strive to protect. If you watch liberals closely, they will always worry about the criminals rights, never mentioning the rights of the person they harmed. The victim is unimportant to them. It's this kind of screwy thinking that leads me to believe you have to be a French fry short of a Happy Meal to be a liberal. No sane person would defend a criminal over an innocent victim. It just isn't normal.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-14-14 9:25 PM

You go Granny. When seconds count, the police are minutes away. One thing we must remember is that liberals work off emotions, not common sense. Their mind doesn't work like a normal person's mind. They are incapable of reason, therefor they cannot see the logic in having a weapon on your person, even though they'll admit the police incapable of protecting you, and they always show up after the crime has been committed.

Since they always operate in the "What May Happen" sector of the cosmos, they are incapable of understanding what could be, or could have been prevented, had the victim been armed. Since they strive to protect criminals, they do everything in their power to protect them from harm by a person defending themselves, because the criminals are always more important than the victim. What they fail to understand is that if there were no criminals, there would be no need to carry a gun, but since that will never be the case, get a gun. You can bet the criminals will

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BHirsh

Mar-14-14 6:40 PM

There is no evidence that allowing licensed carry into so-called "sensitive areas" brings any increased risk. It is a fact that criminals bent on violence will walk unobstructed into these areas and take lives, and that the lack of armed average citizens exacerbates the vulnerability. Want to talk about common sense? Come to terms with that verity.

Stop the knee-jerk emotionalism, take off the hackneyed, biased blinders, and wake up.

Peaceable citizens who have been vetted and licensed are NOT risks to children, or anyone else.

To enact laws that supposes that they are is just plain stupid.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrannywithaGun

Mar-14-14 12:15 PM

I'm not what most consider a typical gun owner. I'm a single mom, a grandmother, a hunter and I carry. I wasn't always like this but I've been assaulted in a public place where plenty of children are present and had a man come up from behind me in my own driveway at night. I now carry, why because I have the right to protect myself. It took police over 10 mins to respond to all the situations. I would love to have more conceal carriers and open carriers of firearms where ever I go. I hope he signs the bill. Proud supporter of 2nd Amendment, member of WVCDL & 1MMAGC-WV.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-14-14 6:43 AM

What's the author of this article looking for. a ban in carrying legal firearms in all places where children are? Duh, that's like what, everywhere perhaps. Name one public place where children aren't. The author seems to forget that it's not the "legal" permit holders that are the problem, it's the criminal elements, and no matter how many laws we pass, it's not going to stop them from doing their dastardly deeds.

When will these fools way up and realize you can't legislate criminals. They couldn't care less about public safety, laws or even children. They're criminals. I'd feel much safer sitting in a theater with 200 concealed carry holders, than I ever would sitting among 50 Democrats at a campaign rally. Like it or not liberals, carry permits are here to stay, and there are more of them every day you wake up and rub your beady little eyes.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Independentview

Mar-13-14 7:14 PM

Top Gun Spot on, please continue. I am reminded of the retired military officer that last year was falsely accussed of improprities by the media, drug before Congress by the Liberals, prosecuted in Federal Court, but he was eventually completly exonerated. The appeals court judges apologized to him and stated that he should never have been charged to begin with and he was free to go. The retired military man thanked the panel of judges and asked the question, "now,where do I go to get my reputation back?"

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-13-14 6:19 PM

Major, remember Feinstein's straw purchase of a gun for her grandson? She lied on the questionnaire stating the gun was for her. Relative or not, it was a straw purchase, but nothing ever came of it. How would that play out for you and I? Not well!

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-13-14 6:16 PM

Range, the signs are everywhere. The Democrats are fighting for their life. After the next election, they will have to watch C-Span just to learn what's going on in Congress. I can see the old liberal gargoyles like Reid, Feinstein, Pelosi, and even Kerry jumping ship. Their money is drying up, as well as their support base. It had to happen sooner or later. People are fed up and it's worrying the Democrats to death. When they go down this time, they will be down for the count. Then we can get to work rebuilding this country and reversing all of Obama's legislation and constitutional breeches. My lifetime dream is seeing all of them wearing prison orange.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TopGun

Mar-13-14 6:11 PM

View, ALL anti-gun advocates never produce the evidence. Take a look at Sandy Hook. There were more lies flying around than there were bullets. You have to remember how these people operate. They know the first story to hit the media is the one that sticks in everyone's mind. So they compile their collection of lies, send them to the nearest media outlet, and get it plastered all over the news. It doesn't matter what comes next, corrections, retractions or any other version of the story giving the facts, that first story is embedded in the minds of the public.

They know this is an affective tool, and they use it as often as they can. Charleston is no different, nor are the politicians who work there. Forget the truth, get the lies out there and make your point, even if lacks a shred of truth.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Independentview

Mar-13-14 4:26 PM

For decades Mayor Jones' justification, parrotted by the Gazette for his gun control ordinances was criminals from Detroit were selling their drugs in Charleston and using the money to buy illegal guns on the streets of Charleston from thugs selling guns out of the trunks of their cars. In the 20+ years of Charleston's gun ordinances, the Mayor has never produced ONE photo or video to substantiate his claims. It's truly sad when a mayor resorts to fabricating stories to justify his actions.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 33 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web