The Manchin-Toomey gun control legislation failed on the Senate floor this afternoon by a vote of 54–46.

Many on the Left believe the victims of Newtown, Conn., have been betrayed.

Of course, better background checks would not have prevented the massacre in Newtown. The shooter, Adam Lanza, stole the guns he used from his mother. But why let facts stand in the way of feel-good legislation?

Sen. Harry Reid, who in a procedural move voted “no” on the amendment so that he could bring it to the floor again, insists he’s not giving up.

  • ZoriahShepard

    Do those people really believe that background checks are going to prevent any and all mass shootings or do they just act contrary to whatever conservatives do?

    • Richard Jefferies

      They want to confiscate your guns, that’s all. That is their end game.

      • ZoriahShepard

        You’re right. It’s really not about stopping murders. It’s all politics. And control. I just keep hoping those posting are simply misguided and misled.

      • Kabong30

        That’s reality, and they have said it accidentally and on purpose repeatedly.

    • Jared Forsyth

      I don’t remember anyone claiming that it would prevent all mass shootings…
      But do you see anything wrong with background checks?

      • SideshowJon36

        Would it prevent ANY mass shootings? None of the massacres were caused by guns obtained without background checks.

      • Trey

        The background check was a open door to registration. Also in as much as the bill has been kept in the dark.. the parts that have leaked (if true) included that your doctor could on his own volition ban you from a fundamental right, with out due process or any form of realistic recourse

      • Alex Furlong

        1) This was expanding the background check system into territory that wasn’t causing a problem. Why fix what isn’t broken?

        2) The bill was crafted badly enough to enable a registration scheme.

        3) Emotional blackmail to get pet Democrat agendas passed is no way to go through Congress, son.

      • Quantummist

        Then why use the dead kids and there parents as political pawns to get it passed then? That’s Abhorrent… And using poor brain damaged Giffords as a stage prop is sickening…

  • Steve_J

    Sorry, but I have as much time for the families of the children who were murdered as I do for the “Jersey Girls” for allowing themselves to be used by partiisan politicians to advance a specific agenda aimed at undermining the Second Amendment.

  • ForTheRepublic

    Good god, when are these idiots going to get it through their thick skulls that its not about “stronger background checks”, its not about Newtown, it’s not about any of it! All it is are people who are too gun illiterate to know the difference between a clip and a magazine trying to tell us what we law-abiding citizens “need”. That’s it.

    • Kabong30

      I don’t deny them their right to grieve and to feel how they feel. I simply do not accept their desire to prevent me from protecting my family because they tragically lost part of theirs. Pray for these people and help them heal, just know that their ideas come from a place of grief and not logic.

  • kateorjane

    Unfortunately the families of those lost at Newtown have allowed themselves to be used for something that wouldn’t have prevented it. I would have more respect for those who gave up all pretense and just admitted that they wanted to gut the 2nd and eliminate the right of civilians to have guns. at least those people would be owning their intentions.

  • Billie Slash

    Liberals ignore the horrors of Kermit Gosnell, and vilify fellow citizens’ stand for the 2ndA. The selective moral outrage is sickening.

  • Squirrel!

    Just had to turn my TV off with Obama and his fake outrage on top of the disinformation he was spewing. Looks like 4 traitor Republicans for & 5 scared of losing their seats Democrats against. Good! Why can’t we focus on something that really matters & will make a difference?

    • Richard Jefferies

      Oh it wasn’t fake outrage. Just like my 10 month old screaming and throwing a tantrum isn’t fake.

      • Squirrel!

        True, but his outrage is that he didn’t get his way. It wasn’t outrage for the Newtown/Gabby Giffords props he used. Anyway, I think you’re right,but he is still a phoney.

  • brewerandpatriot

    I’m sure if Adam Lanza’s mom would have ran a background check on him before he killed her, she would have realized he was nucking futs and would not have let him kill her and steal her guns…

  • Diane Stephan

    A background check would not have prevented the Newtown massacre, they were not his guns.

  • Joe W.

    Just got finished watching Barky spit and lie after his “common sense” gun grab failed miserably. It did my heart good to see him take it right on the chin. I have no empathy or sympathy left for those “Sandy Hook” and/or “Newtown” props that allowed themselves to be pimped by Obama so often they have jet lag. The 2nd Amendment is NOT open for modification. Period. I do not care how upset Barky gets or how many props he trots out or how many graves he dances on.

  • mcian

    Liberty prevails. Punishing those that have committed no crime does nothing to solve, prevent or reduce crime. It’s time you liberals start getting this simple fact through your melons.

  • sleazyrider

    Richard Jefferies above nailed it…bottom line.


    I am done caring about Newton. I care about the kids that were murdered and pray to God for them but to keep feeling sorry for the family’s is over. They have been used as props and are trying to take away my civil rights.

  • sodakhic

    Just enforce the laws we have, idiots.

  • conservativemomma


  • Kabong30

    Reid votes no, but it’s not over? Ok.

    • catb55

      I just heard he voted no so that he could bring up the bill again .. watch for some dark of night vote!

  • Tom Anderson

    Ummmmm, …..

    For the bill to go down in the Democrat controlled Senate with those numbers, Democrats voted against it too you fools.
    Republican Senators met individually with Newtown parents last week, keep up.
    How is having Newtown on ones conscience different than having blood on your hands from allowing Newtown to happen, is one worse than the other? I’m confused.
    If we want to stop another Newtown, shouldn’t new laws actually do something to stop criminal and the mentally ill from obtaining/killing people?
    Progressives and useful idiots really confuse me. I cant get the hang of their pretzel logic.

  • camnpat

    Am I the only one feeling aghast at the hypocrisy of these Newtown folks claiming to be doing something “for the children” yet coldly embracing the spotlight after just a short time of losing a child? Claiming to be trying to avoid the “next Newtown” yet not concerned at all about the actual culprit, his motives, and mental state?

  • Jack Deth

    Oh, cry me a freakin’ river!

    Background checks and gun control laws do NOTHING to stop criminals. Because criminals DO NOT OBEY laws!!!

    Chicago is an excellent example. As was DC, until the Heller decision. Which has miraculously brought murders and deaths due to crime back to 1960s levels.

  • $472942

    Dingy Harry Reid is a vile and evil little man…

  • David

    Who is that weirdo in sunglasses with a perverse grin hugging that woman?

    • camnpat

      I thought it was Biden.

  • annoyinglittletwerp

    Adam Lanza STOLE the guns he used in Newtown. Hey libs: Please explain to me how increased restriction on the second amendment rights of the law-abiding will stop criminals from STEALING weapons to use in crimes. I’m all ears.

    • camnpat

      Don’t forget that it is all an emotional response. It is about “feeling” safe in your head knowing that people are unarmed. It is not about actually being safe because you can protect yourself.

  • HWarrior13

    Angry Lefties tweeting… are better than porn to me

  • Jared Forsyth

    so… are we all clear on what this amendment would *actually do*? for those who are a little foggy, here’s the full text: . If you want to have an opinion on this issue, you should *at least read the thing*. The first two lines are:

    > (1) Congress supports, respects, and defends the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
    > (2) Congress supports and reaffirms the existing prohibition on a national firearms registry.

    Hmm. Looks pretty normal.

    > Nothing in this title, or any amendment made by this title, shall be construed to-
    > (1) expand in any way the enforcement authority or jurisdiction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; or
    > (2) allow the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a Federal firearms registry.

    They’re really not kidding about the whole “this is not gonna grab your guns”.

    • Trey

      Ok, how about Dr’s getting to ignore HIPPA ?
      (E) whether medical doctors and other mental health professionals have the ability, without negative legal or professional consequences, to notify law enforcement officials when a patient is a danger to himself or others

      (H) the effect of depictions of mass violence in the media, and any impact of such depictions on incidents of mass violence;

      the availability of information regarding the construction of weapons, including explosive devices, and any impact of such information on such incidents of mass violence
      Flush 1st amendment too then ?

      3) TESTIMONY OF VICTIMS AND SURVIVORS.-In determining the root causes of these recurring and tragic incidents of mass violence, the Commission shall, in accordance with section 144(a), take the testimony of victims and survivors to learn and memorialize their views and experiences regarding such incidents of mass violence

      Victim-hood does not make anyone an expert, if fact emotion is the death of reason.

      Note there is near 0% chance that a democrat committee would not vote to let all these happen

      VOLUNTARY BACKGROUND CHECKS.-Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, the Attorney General shall promulgate regulations allowing licensees to use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System established under this section for purposes of conducting voluntary preemployment background checks on prospective employees

      so if your prospective employer wants to check up on you he can have NICS do it ?

      Nothing in this subtitle, or an amendment made by this subtitle, shall be construed-
      2 )to extend background check requirements to temporary transfers for purposes including lawful hunting or sporting or to temporary possession of a firearm for purposes of examination or evaluation by a prospective transferee.

      Note Eric Holder would be the one promulgating regulation defining “temporary”

      Note also that if this section were not enforced even picking up a firearm to look at it with out a NICS check would be a fed crime.

      The bill it self states that it is attempting to regulate INTRASTATE commerce
      (B) the transfer is made between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee residing in the same State, which takes place in such State,

      It attempts to skirt the INTRASTATE prohibition with this over reach
      (gun show )means any event at which 75 or more firearms are offered or exhibited for sale, exchange, or transfer, if 1 or more of the firearms has been shipped or transported in, or otherwise affects, interstate or foreign commerce;

      Which is violates the priciaple as held by SCOTUS in US v Lopez

      Section 922(q) is a criminal statute that by its terms has nothing to do with “commerce” or any sort of economic enterprise, however broadly one might define those terms. Section 922(q) is not an essential part of a larger regulation of economic activity, in which the regulatory scheme could be undercut unless the intrastate activity were regulated. It cannot, therefore, be sustained under our cases upholding regulations of activities that arise out of or are connected with a commercial transaction, which viewed in the aggregate, substantially affects interstate commerce.

      Note 1 firearm does not substantially affects interstate commerce.

      There is no limit to how much a FFL may charge to do this “check” either nor the requirement that they do so.

  • evy in arkansas

    Democratic Senator Mark Pryor from Arkansas voted nay on this one. He will not get this registered Democrats vote next year!!

  • Keith Berry

    Obama wanted a vote…he got it! LOSER! Now shut your pie hole Obama!

  • Kingofthehill

    Funny they aren’t mad at the dems that didn’t vote for it lol.

    “How could they”. Easy, they listened to their constituents not an emotional few that want to say they got SOMETHING done and hurt the law abiding gun owners instead of taking advice from the right and doing the RIGHT thing.

    Their fault… They also got greedy and just stuffed the bill with their anti-gun wish list instead of just focusing on the real issues.

    Oh yeah, what about all the lefts talk of mental health? Oh yeah, tat was just their foot in the door to get the ball rolling and they didn’t give a crap about it, they wanted a BAN

  • TDS

    And what part of the law would have prevented the tragedy in Newtown again???

  • TDS

    The first REAL problem (which the gun-grabbers seem to
    completely ignore) is that “Gun-free Zones” are seen as target rich environments for any lunatics that want to go on shooting sprees.

    The second REAL problem (that they also completely ignore) is that taking guns
    away from law-abiding citizens doesn’t make anyone safer.

    The third REAL problem (which is not surprisingly also ignored) is that NONE of
    the proposed legislation would have actually prevented ANY of the mass
    shootings from happening.

    So please, would you short-sighted, knee-jerk reactionary Liberals just quit
    lying to yourselves and everyone else and just come out and say what you really
    want: A repeal of the Second Amendment and complete confiscation of ALL guns.

    You know it.

    We know it.

    Just be honest about it for a change.

  • Marcy Cook

    I lost all empathy towards the Newtown parents when they made themselves political. For Christ’s sake your kids are dead, spend some time mourning them.

  • Right Wired

    They really need to start covering the democratic process and the Bill of Rights in schools. Twitter would lose half of its whiney tweets

  • Stan

    The Newtown families are being used to push an agenda nobody wants but Obama and his radical friends. He was almost one step closer to his takeover by getting guns out of Americans hands and leaving his goons armed to the teeth.

  • Rich

    What about a pressure cooker background check?

  • SideTraKd

    You know the bill is bad and liberals are lying when they use Newtown victims as props to pass a bill that would not have stopped Newtown from happening.

  • Rulz

    “Can’t imagine what that car ride home from DC is going to be like for Newtown families tonight. #NRA”

    You expect me to believe they took a car from CT to DC?