Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
I don't know anything about Manchin's prior record, but I don' t think the NRA would have backed him unless he was solidly pro gun rights.
Same with Harry Reid. He had a pretty solid pro gun record.
It puts the nRA in a difficult spot because they don't want to punish guys who voted with them, even if the opposing candidate would probably be better.
I don't think that will be an issue with Manchin and Reid in the future. They showed their colors. I am also very disappointed in Toomey, who was supposed to be this solid conservative. I cut republicans in blue states more slack, but he was out there with Manchin actively trying to screw us.
Obviously, I don't go along with the argument that some compromise here would have been a good idea. Any erosion of our rights just gets the anti gun nazis one step closer to their goal of total confiscation. Instead of working on compromises, I expect our guys to be out there explaining why these bills are terrible policy.
The most intractable issue is the one of mental health. Virtually all of these mass shooters were known nut cases. Yet liberals refuse to make it easy to even identify them, much less restrict their access to firearms. Then of course, we have to be very careful about defining mental health. It could easily be a two-edged sword. Lots of liberals consider the desire to own a gun to be prima facie evidence of mental illness. That cow who runs Homeland Security has said that the biggest risks are patriot groups, anti-tax activists, etc. So I am nervous about giving government much more say in deciding who gets a gun on mental illness grounds. I think we could probably agree on a few diagnoses, eg paranoid schizophrenia, that would disqualify you, but even then we have to provide due process.
