Toomey, Machin err
The actions of U.S. Sens. Toomey and Manchin to change the Second Amendment without an amendment process are exactly why the Founders, in their wisdom, had senators nominated by and beholden to state legislatures. They were to protect the sovereignty of their respective states, not to knee-jerk respond to public emotion based on events and polls.
There is no such thing in the Constitution as federal gun laws — only a provision that says “the right to bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” If the Senate wants to change the Constitution, it should follow the amendment process outlined in Article V.
The public has been so numbed over the Obama years that the expected uproar over yet another Obama federal power grab has been predictably muted. It is a sad day for America when a purported constitutional senator, Toomey, can publicly violate his oath of office and side for laws that are legal fictions.
The ironic part of this misguided legislation is that private sales are not regulated and guns can pass from anyone to anyone claimed as family or friend.
Of course, since criminals, who use whatever weapon to kill, always violate any law on the books, making more laws will have nothing to do to with solving the real problem — sinking morality in a nation in decline.
The writer is president of the PA Republican Leadership Council (pagopwing.com).
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Foley & Obama II
- Rushing to judge
- Foley & Obama I
- Bring back ‘eagle cam’
- LED sign: Negative ad
- Self-serving & corrupt
- Missing WJAS
- Life Care Center a jewel
- Monopoly’s markup
- Oberdorf firing incomprehensible
- Holder no help President Obama …