Full Text of Toomey Gun Control Bill

NA_Wreckdiver said:

I don't see anything objectionable.
In fact, I don't see that it changes much from the way things are currently.
(In Pennsylvania at least)
If anything, it seems to ease a few things.

Click to expand...

Then you are not reading this with open eyes.

I encourage everyone to read full text of the Public Safety And Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013. I vote not according to party affiliation but if the person, no matter what office he/she is running for, is in favor of protecting the rights of traditional families, protecting the rights of the unborn, protecting our civil liberties, defends the Constitution including out 2nd Amendment Rights. I voted for Pat Toomey last time. I WILL NOT DO THAT EVER AGAIN.

So this is saying they will violate HIPPA, just like the state of NY: 4) There are deficits in the background check system in existence prior to the date of enactment of this Act and the Department of Justice should make it a top priority to work with States to swiftly input missing records, including mental health records.

This is basically saying that friends, neighbors, co-workers or anyone in general has the right to turn you the gun owner/purchaser/seller in if they suspect you have purchased, sold, acquired or own a gun illegally. (5) Congress and the citizens of the United States agree that in order to promote safe and responsible gun ownership, dangerous criminals and the seriously mentally ill should be prohibited from possessing firearms; therefore, it should be incumbent upon all citizens to ensure weapons are not being transferred to such people.

Hmm, so all the posts made right after Newtown by most of those posting saying mental health was the primary issue... changed their minds???

That as point of beginning for this discussion. Not a slight or slam on anyone. But - we can go back and look at all the posts here on this site about that very issue.

So I have to ask. What is the solution? The overwhelming conclusion by most after the shooting up there and before in other events was it was the mental issues being more to blame than the person or weapon.

I was and still am in agreement with that. Just as I agree the violent video games desensitize all playing them to violence and the ability to shoot another human.

And before any one takes issue with the above statement - think about the reason the US military and all LE do not use circular targets on weapons ranges opting instead for half silhouettes...


So if most posting after the Newtown shootings and others, posted and felt that mental issues had to be addressed as part of the solution to prevent more such shootings, but now have issues with an attempt to resolve those issues -


What is the solution to THAT problem?

There is already federal law mandating the reporting of that information. Even before HIPPA - it wasn't being done. Just as reporting felons and others not eligible for lawful gun ownership was not being reported.

Yet we say, enforce the current laws before passing new ones.


Guys and gals - we can have this one way or another. But not both. True, both sides of the coin have similar issues, but what we have now wasn't being enforced, and had been compromised by the health law privacy act.

So what is the answer to this particular part of the background check issue currently - or if this amendment becomes law?

Though I agree with many of John’s concerns about not trusting our current government I still have to ask what is the answer then.

Should everyone just continue to turn a blind eye toward the lunatics that we all know shouldn’t have access to firearms but do?

I don’t know the answers to the questions being asked but I have to stand by the fact that some people with mental and/or drug issues should not be eligible to buy or have possession of firearms. How we reach that objective seems to be the real challenge we all face yet I don’t hear anyone in opposition to the current legislations offering any better alternatives.

Society, including most of us gun owners; know that mentally unstable people shouldn’t; have firearms. Society has always demanded solutions from the government once they have identified or even perceived a problem. That hasn’t and isn’t going to change. We as gun owners have to either work toward helping to find better solutions to those problems or we are going to be stuck with the solutions we aren’t at all in favor of in the future.

Dick Bodenhorn

Maybe we need to take the offense instead of playing defense.

So, it seems MOST of those strongly opposed to this "bill", "amendment", whatever...
are opposed in principle, "that it is one more restriction", not necessarily what it attempts to do.

So... what if you give them that, it actually seems to relax some things in Pennsylvania.
(though state law can make things stricter, so nothing may change)

Then, like the recent decisions of Heller vs. DC, the words of this bill, the NEW "tightening" this bill creates...
go after further expansion of rights. Get things like suppressors removed from NFA on the basis of "hearing health" and
"environmentally friendly" (noise pollution), and the fact that they do nothing to increase crime.

Just keep going after them. Turn the tables, use their tactics against them.
The NRA should wage a LOW KEY publicity campaign promoting our position.
It's strategically better to promote a position, than to defend one.