HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Rep. Carolyn McCarthy say...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 09:30 AM

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy says more must be done to keep guns out of the hands of convicted criminals

Local leaders on both sides of the New York City-Nassau County border — Mayor Bloomberg and Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice — are doing everything they can to keep their cops and constituents safe.

But we must do more to keep guns out of the hands of convicted criminals and other dangerous people. Federal lawmakers need to take action, too.

That means improving the National Instant Criminal Background Check system so those trying to buy through traditional, legal channels are stopped in their tracks. Right now, Congress doesn’t fund the program well enough for it to be effective.

It also means closing the gun-show loophole by requiring a background check for every gun sale in the United States. Such checks would choke the supply chain for illegal gun dealers, who go down to states where background checks aren’t required.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/mccarthy-guns-people-problem-article-1.1190804#ixzz2ADt1c0HW

24 replies, 1697 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 24 replies Author Time Post
Reply Rep. Carolyn McCarthy says more must be done to keep guns out of the hands of convicted criminals (Original post)
SecularMotion Oct 2012 OP
aikoaiko Oct 2012 #1
Remmah2 Oct 2012 #2
slackmaster Oct 2012 #3
former-republican Oct 2012 #7
Db Owen97 Oct 2012 #4
sarisataka Oct 2012 #5
SecularMotion Oct 2012 #6
Db Owen97 Oct 2012 #10
SecularMotion Oct 2012 #12
oneshooter Oct 2012 #15
virginia mountainman Oct 2012 #17
SecularMotion Oct 2012 #18
Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #20
ileus Oct 2012 #8
gejohnston Oct 2012 #9
Db Owen97 Oct 2012 #11
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #13
4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #14
trouble.smith Oct 2012 #16
SecularMotion Oct 2012 #19
trouble.smith Oct 2012 #21
SecularMotion Oct 2012 #22
glacierbay Oct 2012 #24
rl6214 Oct 2012 #23

Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 09:37 AM

1. Too bad she doesn't ponder why her constituents buy guns illegally and victimize each other.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 10:16 AM

2. I wonder what she really means? nt

 

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 10:24 AM

3. Open up the NICS background check system to non-federal firearms licensees

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #3)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 12:35 PM

7. That would be pretty easy to do.

 

But it still wouldn't stop criminals from buying firearms.
Stopping illegal gun sales is like trying to stop illegal drug sales.

Why it's only available to FFL's never made any sense to me.

It's the same thing is when a person wants to buy a gun from a private party.

If you suspect it could be stolen and you call the police they refuse to run a serial number check.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 11:25 AM

4. To SecularMotion

 

Isn't that the same person that said a barrel shroud is and I quote "The shoulder-thing that goes up?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Db Owen97 (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 11:47 AM

5. You are correct

On the April 18, 2007, episode of MSNBC's program Tucker, Tucker Carlson interviewed McCarthy about the Virginia Tech massacre and her proposed reauthorization of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. He asked her to explain the need to regulate barrel shrouds, one of the many provisions included in her bill. She did not directly answer as she had no clue what she was even talking about, so instead she responded that what was more important was that the legislation would ban large capacity "clips" (sic) of the type used in the Virginia Tech massacre and that the class of guns chosen prohibited by the law were those used by gangs and killers of police officers. The Virginia Tech shooter did not have high capacity magazines; they were the AWB compliant 10 round variety, once again showing her general lack of knowledge on the subject. When Carlson pressed her twice more on the question about barrel shrouds, she finally admitted that she did not know what a barrel shroud was, and said (incorrectly): "I believe it is a shoulder thing that goes up." The error received negative attention from the conservative media and made for a hilarious video online.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolyn_McCarthy#Gun_control

I found this also:
McCarthy introduced (H.R. 2640, the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007) to remedy this problem. The bill, with the support of the National Rifle Association, was passed by the House and signed by President Bush.

emphasis added

Must be a mistake... aren't we told this never happens... gun everywhere for everyone...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Db Owen97 (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 11:50 AM

6. You never answered my question

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #6)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 12:55 PM

10. What question did you ask me?

 

It's kind of tricky to figure out this spot (I'm use to the standard structure of a forum)

Feel free to ask me and I'll answer to the best of my ability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Db Owen97 (Reply #10)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:26 PM

12. It would be best to reply in the original thread

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #12)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:41 PM

15. Why should he, when you rairly answer any questions directed to you.

" Do you support the Brady Campaign and /or the Violence Prevention center?"

And if so then how?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #15)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 01:20 AM

17. One he don't support the Brady Campain...

No one individual cares enough to give more than $200.... NO ONE......

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Contributors
Select a Cycle:

Individual donors gave 0 large ($200+) contributions to this PAC in 2011-2012.


http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgave2.php?cycle=2012&cmte=C00113449

Heck Brady has a little more cash on hand than I personally spent on my almost 16 year old daughter's 10 year old used car for her. LOL it was no BMW, but a mere Pontiac...

End Cash on Hand $3,701


O well, when you support very unpopular legislation, no suprise you have a hard time finding funding.

But hey!! They gave $500 dollars in political contributions, to "A" democrat...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #15)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 05:20 AM

18. I'm a Democrat who supports the party platform on guns

We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements--like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole--so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.

http://www.issues2000.org/celeb/Democratic_Party_Gun_Control.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #18)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 07:01 AM

20. Apparently not in any meaningful way NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Db Owen97 (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 12:35 PM

8. That was a real quote from someone? LOL

Now that's fumby...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #8)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 12:42 PM

9. you haven't seen it?



of course there are those heat seeking bullets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=BRQqieimwLQ

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #9)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:13 PM

11. Oh yes...

 

And lets not forget those puppy,baby,and kitten killing .223 bullets that destroy a police station whenever they are fired (even if they are fired in another country,I think they leave anti-semitic messages in their wake as well) *Sarcasm : Off*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Db Owen97 (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:34 PM

13. A genuine prohibitionist maintains the purest ignorance of that which is to be banned.nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:42 PM

14. Ok, everyone who has ever committed a crime will have their hands removed

 

and be tattooed so they can never have a job which would allow them to buy guns or prosthetic replacements.

There.

Problem solved.

Sure it violates some rights. But you don't want children to be killed do you? It's really about them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 10:14 PM

16. how about you start by locking up convicted criminals

 

and then not releasing them back onto the streets if they are still a threat to the police and your constituents? as opposed to, say, harassing hard working, law abiding, tax paying citizens who are also part of your constituencies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Reply #16)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 05:24 AM

19. So background checks on gun buyers are harassment?

That's a very extreme position, even the NRA supports background checks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #19)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 07:18 AM

21. The NRA doesn't support ending private firearms sales between law abiding citizens and neither do I.

 

furthermore, I don't think closing the so called "gun show loophole" will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and I think it's just the beginning of more draconian restrictions on second amendment rights which, you'll recall, shall not be infringed upon. we all know that ending private firearm sales is just the tip of the spear point aimed at the second amendment. What's more, as usual, this seemingly good intentioned legislative idea is rooted in the false premise that guns are the problem. Guns are not the problem, criminals are the problems so go after the criminals and quit worrying about guns in the hands of law abiding citizens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Reply #21)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 07:38 AM

22. Who said anything about ending private firearm sales?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #19)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 12:47 PM

24. I do support background checks on private sales of firearms

 

unfortunately, private sellers can't access the NICS system right now, I would like to see the NICS opened up for private sellers with a simple yes or no on sale.
No registration, no records kept, nothing, just yes or no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 08:28 AM

23. Ol' one trick pony McCarthy is at it again, eh?

 

"Rep. Carolyn McCarthy is a Nassau County Democrat. She was elected to Congress in 1996, three years after her husband, Dennis, was murdered in a gun rampage on a Long Island Rail Road train."



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/mccarthy-guns-people-problem-article-1.1190804#ixzz2AJTt9SoR

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread