Marco Rubio "open to changes in gun laws" [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Marco Rubio "open to changes in gun laws"


G19G20
12-17-2012, 18:46
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2012/12/17/rubio-open-changes-in-gun-laws/?wprss=rss_election-2012


Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) remains a supporter of Second Amendment rights but is “open to measures that would keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill,” his spokesman told the.....


Note to Sen. Rubio. Both of those instances are already illegal. Makes me wonder how he has been graded so highly by both the NRA and GOA when there hasn't been any gun related legislation of note since he was elected in 2010 and he puts out stupid statements like this one. I smell another "moderate" in the making.

callihan_44
12-17-2012, 18:48
boy the criminals are shaking in their boots, whatever will they do when they want to commit a crime?

Ruble Noon
12-17-2012, 18:51
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) remains a supporter of Second Amendment rights but is “open to measures that would keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill,” his spokesman told the.....

And this would have had absolutely zero effect on the CT shooting as the killer was not the purchaser or owner of the firearms.

cowboy1964
12-17-2012, 19:10
I'm all for keeping guns out of the mentally ill's hand too. D U H. Now, tell us how?

Magelk
12-17-2012, 19:13
Just wait, you're gonna see a bunch more of the rats jump ship.

IvanVic
12-17-2012, 19:27
Just wait, you're gonna see a bunch more of the rats jump ship.

The NRA itself has previously said the exact same thing.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

G19G20
12-17-2012, 19:34
The NRA itself has previously said the exact same thing.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)


Here's my surprised face ---> :yawn:

Im sure the NRA will find a way to support "common sense compromise" legislation.

IvanVic
12-17-2012, 19:48
Here's my surprised face ---> :yawn:

Im sure the NRA will find a way to support "common sense compromise" legislation.

Which part of Rubio's statement do you disagree with? You're against preventing the mentally ill from owning firearms?


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

barbedwiresmile
12-17-2012, 19:53
But wait- I thought Rubio was the next GOP golden boy?

Oh well, can you imagine how 'open' Romney would have been to more gun control?

HarleyGuy
12-17-2012, 19:58
I wonder if anyone in Washington D.C is concerned about keeping "assault weapons" and other illegal guns out of the hands of the Mexican drug cartels?:wow:

Had it not been for a a couple of patriots at the BATFE blowing the whistle on the "Fast and Furious" debacle, the Three Muskateers would have blamed U.S. gun owners and FFL dealers for their screw ups.

Sen. Manchin D-WV sure stuck in the backs of his constituents....and with an A-rating from the NRA!

If these politicians, and this President really wants to do something constructive to curb gun violence, how about PROSECUTING those who actually commit crimes with guns?

This is the same SOS, only a different day, with different players.:steamed:

Kablam
12-17-2012, 20:57
But wait- I thought Rubio was the next GOP golden boy?

Ah shoot. You beat me to it.

ModGlock17
12-17-2012, 22:39
But wait- I thought Rubio was the next GOP golden boy?

Oh well, can you imagine how 'open' Romney would have been to more gun control?


Moooove with the wind, Baby. You've got to moooove with the wind.

LOL

Basic Observation: First politician who makes a decision immediately after an event, tends to make a fool of himself when the rest of the facts come out.

Proof: "If I had a son, he'd look like ..... "

TxGun
12-17-2012, 23:07
We can sing to choir all we want, but these are politicians and politicians are going to gauge the mood of their constituents and they are generally going to vote accordingly. That is, after all, what we would typically want them to do. And most of them do want to get re-elected. If calls and letters to Rubio are overwhelmingly in favor of changes to gun laws, what would you have him do? Ignore his constituents? Doesn't sound like he's committed to vote one way or the other at this point.

Gundude
12-17-2012, 23:12
We can sing to choir all we want, but these are politicians and politicians are going to gauge the mood of their constituents and they are generally going to vote accordingly. That is, after all, what we would typically want them to do. And most of them do want to get re-elected. If calls and letters to Rubio are overwhelmingly in favor of changes to gun laws, what would you have him do? Ignore his constituents?If those changes are unconstitutional, then yes, of course. His responsibility to defend the constitution supercedes his responsibility to do his constituents' bidding. Otherwise we're stuck with the pure form of democracy: two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

TxGun
12-17-2012, 23:18
If those changes are unconstitutional, then yes, of course. His responsibility to defend the constitution supercedes his responsibility to do his constituents' bidding. Otherwise we're stuck with the pure form of democracy: two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

Well, of course. The key word being "If".

G19G20
12-18-2012, 02:51
Which part of Rubio's statement do you disagree with? You're against preventing the mentally ill from owning firearms?


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Using the purest interpretation of the 2A, no Im not opposed to it. There's a lot of mentally ill people that don't harm other people, guns available to them or not. I don't like collectivism and the definition of "mentally ill" is entirely subjective. A very small group of people, they that write the DSM manuals, deciding such important liberties as the right to defend oneself with whatever tool you decide? Since when are mentally ill people to not be able to defend themselves? No thanks. I don't really support that.

Crazy people are going to do crazy things and you'll never legislate that out of existence. In the whole population I don't support punishing many millions for the unfortunate actions of a very tiny few.

Regardless of my opinion mentally ill people are already barred from gun ownership due to the VT shooting spree. Rubio should at least know this. He's leaving his "options open" with his statement and it's obvious.

cowboywannabe
12-18-2012, 04:49
maybe along with a criminal history check he thinks there should be some sort of instant check for metal illness where one was remanded by the courts....

IvanVic
12-18-2012, 05:22
Using the purest interpretation of the 2A, no Im not opposed to it. There's a lot of mentally ill people that don't harm other people, guns available to them or not. I don't like collectivism and the definition of "mentally ill" is entirely subjective. A very small group of people, they that write the DSM manuals, deciding such important liberties as the right to defend oneself with whatever tool you decide? Since when are mentally ill people to not be able to defend themselves? No thanks. I don't really support that.

Crazy people are going to do crazy things and you'll never legislate that out of existence. In the whole population I don't support punishing many millions for the unfortunate actions of a very tiny few.

Regardless of my opinion mentally ill people are already barred from gun ownership due to the VT shooting spree. Rubio should at least know this. He's leaving his "options open" with his statement and it's obvious.

He does know this, he apparently thinks that there are some flaws in the implementation.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

CAcop
12-18-2012, 07:45
Remember a lot of this stuff politicians are saying is posturing. Obama threw in a caveat of "everything in my power." Meaning that if the House blocked him he might be willing to throw up his hands and say, "Well I tried." Remember this a is a guy who voted "present" most often on his way to the top.

Rubio is essentially voting present. There has been talk over the last few years of tightening up of reporting requirements of the states in regards to people with mental health issues. They have died quick deaths because they throw in people with PTSD which accounts for 1/3 of active duty police officers and of course military vets.

I would be willing to bet the end result is short of a 1994 or even CA AWB. My guess would be better definitions of who is "too crazy to own a gun" and maybe registration requirements of any 10+ firearm.

Remember right now they re fighting over the fiscal cliff, followed by the debt cieling, followed by Bengazi, followed by FandF. FandF may also play a part. The GOP may get a chance to hold hearings on it if they go for gun control.

Paul7
12-18-2012, 09:15
But wait- I thought Rubio was the next GOP golden boy?

Oh well, can you imagine how 'open' Romney would have been to more gun control?

A lot less than Barry.

With the current makeup of the House any serious gun control is DOA. This sounds crass, but after a little while this will all blow over. The pols will run after the next shiny object.

series1811
12-18-2012, 10:04
I'm all for keeping guns out of the mentally ill's hand too. D U H. Now, tell us how?

Or for letting them drive cars, use drugs, get married, or do anything else where they could cause harm.

But, how is right.

Captain Ron
12-18-2012, 11:33
Marco Rubio Is just another RINO he will do or say any thing depending which way the wind is blowing. I would not vote for him for dog catcher.

walt cowan
12-18-2012, 11:35
rino turning on it's owner again. keep voting for club members. oh yeeee fools!