Mike Stuart
A former state Republican Party Chairman says gun owners are not criminals and they should not be treated as such.
“The Second Amendment means something to a lot of people in this country and law abiding citizens are going to use their guns in a responsible fashion,” Mike Stuart said on Tuesday’s MetroNews Talkline.
He says U.S. Senator Joe Manchin needs to be clear about what exactly he means when he calls for limits on the availability of assault weapons in the wake of last week’s shootings of 20 kids and six adults at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut.
Investigators say the shooter, Adam Lanza, 20, shot his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and opened fire on an entire class of young students before killing himself. He had earlier killed his mother, Nancy. One of his guns was an assault style rifle.
Stuart says a lot of people are paying attention to what Senator Manchin says is saying about gun control this week.
“He’s a Senator from West Virginia, a state that so much loves its outdoorsmen, it’s sportsmanship, and we are law abiding citizens for the most part,” he said of the weight Senator Manchin’s statements about gun control carry.
“Being from West Virginia, being a so called ‘devout conservative,’ provides great, pardon the pun, ammunition to those folks who want to limit the ability of law abiding citizens to have guns.”
Stuart says the focus, in the coming weeks and days, needs to be on strengthening background checks and increasing information sharing, not on limiting gun ownership for people who use the weapons responsibly.
A nationwide ban on assault weapons expired in 2004.
West Virginia’s senior U.S. Senator, Jay Rockefeller, says he first voted for the ban in 1994 and would do so again. He said the following in a statement issued this week:
“West Virginia has a proud hunting tradition and respect for the Second Amendment. But most hunters I talk with know that prohibiting the use of military grade weapons or clips that can fire dozens of rounds in a matter of seconds will not impact those traditions, nor do they have a place on our streets,” Senator Rockefeller said.
“We need to pass a bill that will again prohibit such weapons.”
California Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, says she will introduce legislation that would ban assault weapons in January.
11
Comments
Jim
The second amendment has nothing to do with deer hunting. It was adopted to protect citizens from soldiers and police officers. The people cannot oppose tyranny with flintlocks and shotguns, and the tyrants know it.
December 18, 2012 at 11:40 am | Report comment
jeff
you think you can stop the government with an ar 15? seriously?
December 18, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Report comment
Shadow
Any attempt for this government to become a dictatorship, ie, change the form of government, would invoke a Civil War. However, there is no evidence that the Military would support such an effort. If it did, then those members of the Military that side with the government and have relatives at home risk retaliation. Just remember, there are no Rules of Engagement in a Civil War. The old saying, fight fire with fire applies. And I, and a lot of others, will keep our AR15's ready.
December 19, 2012 at 9:22 am | Report comment
deer hunter
please dont use the constitution to justify assault weapons...it reminds me of people useing religion to justify flying planes into buildings...they have nothing to do with each other....states needed to protect themselves because the federal government couldnt...thats why we have the second. the contstitution never said we the right to do alot of things we now do. times change,issues change, peoples views change. its time we change our view on this. there is no slippery slope thats propaganda. banning certain guns does not infringe anyones right to be a sportsman...by the way does the second allow me to own a nuke? just asking
December 18, 2012 at 1:36 pm | Report comment
Shadow
You must be a Democrat and have swallowed the Party line "Hook, line and sinker". As I recall the Constitution, I never saw the word "hunting" anyplace. You must never have served this Country as those that do, swear to uphold and protect the Constitution. And there are a lot of us that remember that oath.
December 19, 2012 at 9:30 am | Report comment
Jeremiah
You are right. You cannot use the Constitution to justify assault weapons. The Bill of Rights however does just that. There is no doubt about what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote they included the second amendment.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"
-- George Washington
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
"I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."
-- Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787
It goes on and on. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting. Hunting is a privilidge, gun ownership is a right.
December 19, 2012 at 9:59 am | Report comment
Jeff
There were 12,664 'murders' last year. As people scream about 'military looking firearms' that evidently intimidate some, know the facts. Of those murders, there were 8,583 committed with firearms. 6,220 were committed with handguns. Is the media screaming about banning handguns? No. There were 323 committed with rifles (including 'assault rifles). Of course, that is too many, but there were 356 killed with shotguns. Is the media ranting about shotguns? No. There were 1,694 murders committed by stabbing. Are we talking about banning knives? No. What is the expectation of decreasing the number of killings if we totally ban your so-called 'assault weapons', 323 total? The point is, the problem is not the AR-15, AK-47 or variant, or Uzi... The problem is greater than the gun, and banning them doesn't change things. Of the 62 mass killings since 1966, 4 were by only a 'military style' rifle. All the rest were either by handgun only, handgun and shotgun, handgun shotgun and rifle, explosives/arson, airplanes, and even a flame thrower. Crazy people getting guns....thats the problem. [FBI]Furthermore, the 'rate of fire' of a revolver is exactly the same as a semi-auto, meaning, a person with 2 revolvers can fire 20 rounds in 3-4 seconds (there are 10 round revolvers), so there is no relevance to "10 round magazines" for handguns, mine holds 17. If I have a handgun for personal protection, who is someone who sits behind a desk to say that 10 rounds is enough? Don't forget the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, its NOT to secure the right to hunt, but to protect your life, property, and the republic.
December 18, 2012 at 1:37 pm | Report comment
Damion
Good information and comments. Thanks.
January 18, 2013 at 8:12 pm | Report comment
jeff
Stuart is politically profiteering from Manchin's comment exactly as his counterpart would if given the chance. I say a pox on all politicos and if America's problems, of all types, are to be solved then we need to get past pandering to constituencys and choirs.
Otherwise, the same old, same old results.
December 18, 2012 at 4:11 pm | Report comment
Jim
Interesting that Metro News has posted a photo of Senator Joe firing an AR-15 "assualt rifle." The very type of rifle he proposes to ban. Is the message: that I'm responsible enough to use one, but law-abiding citizens are not?
Also, this tragedy sure deflects attention from the Fast & Furous investigation. A case where a Federal Agency (ATF) allowed "assualt" rifles to "walk" accross the border and then be reponsible for hundreds of Mexican's deaths and a U.S. Border Patrol Agent. Then, the president & att'y gen. states they had no knowledge of the program and the president grants executive priveledge and essentially blocks the investigation. But, they are just Mexicans that were killed and they don't count, right?
December 19, 2012 at 9:36 am | Report comment
L Gill
Anti gun people only want to ban guns and don't want to see the real problem MENTAL HEALTH and CRIMINAL INTENT.
December 31, 2012 at 2:39 am | Report comment