Pat Toomey is a turd

Discussion in '2nd Amendment' started by tallbump, Jun 20, 2014.

  1. tallbump

    tallbump Supporting Member

    Sorry, I now it's a bit immature calling names, but don't know what to say.

    I did one of those contact your representatives through NRA. Sent out an email to several political figures telling them where we stand on the 2nd.

    Got this wonderful auto reply from Toomey-you know, of the Manchin-Toomey gun control bill that failed last year.

    This guy co-authors/sponsors a bill for INCREASED gun control that almost took effect ...and has the nerve to say THIS

  2. Back2School

    Back2School Member

    LOL it's kinda like saying "I am a doctor that performs abortions, but I am pro-life"

  3. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    Please don't hesitate to send me another letter that won't be read, and an auto-generated response will be returned.... Out of touch much?
  4. if someone tells a lie often enough people will start believing it.
  5. j_inmon

    j_inmon Member

    No offense man, but if you're that dismayed that a politician tried to lie and mislead you, I'd stay far far away from things like the c-span channel, the primaries, or the presidential debates. You might end up turning green and growling something about hulk smash. :D
  6. tallbump

    tallbump Supporting Member

    Oh no, I know it happens all the time. By both sides.

    It just irks me how the man can champion a gun control effort less than ay ear ago, and now put himself out as an advocate for the 2A. I men, does he really think that people are that stupid or forgetful? Well, I giuess some are, but not this guy
  7. Not at all surprising. hell, even obama claims to be "Pro 2A" they just dont think the rest of us deserve it.

    They always say things like "I believe the right to self defense is fundamental, but we have to draw the line some where"

    If they have to add a but to it. they were lying about the first part
  8. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    I believe this is correct. At the end of 2005, I believe he did have an "A" rating from the NRA. I also know for a fact that Toomey-Manchin was "scored" (rolled into the rating). The NRA server is flaking for me right now (probably the fault of the proxy) so I can't check his current rating, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was now a "B" or lower.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2014
  9. Not2ManyGuns

    Not2ManyGuns Member


    I wonder if Toomey has two canned letters that he sends out for his responses. One, like the one you received, and a totally different letter for the 2nd amendment haters who contacted him in support of his gun control bill that failed last year.

    It would be an interesting experiment to see what response you would get back from him, if you sent him a letter encouraging him to continue his work on gun control.
  10. duster066

    duster066 Supporting Member

    My thoughts exactly.
  11. ekim

    ekim Member

    All that needs to be said is that they are either a politician or a lawyer and lying is a given and neither is to be trusted.
  12. tallbump

    tallbump Supporting Member

    Let's see :D
  13. tallbump

    tallbump Supporting Member

    Sent him one asking him to continue his support for common sense gun control. Let's see what response I get
  14. tallbump

    tallbump Supporting Member

    Got the reply. Of course, since my email was urging for gun control, his reply played up his efforts to pass that Bill last year :rolleyes:

    You'll note, it's also significantly longer than the the pro 2A response too

    Dear Brian,

    Thank you for contacting me about national firearms policy. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

    Like many Pennsylvanians, I have long been a supporter of the Second Amendment. Americans have an individual right to bear arms for self-protection, hunting and recreation. In fact, during my tenure in the House of Representatives (1999-2005), my record of supporting gun owners' rights earned me an "A" rating from the National Rifle Association (NRA).

    As important as Second Amendment rights are, our society recognizes that these rights do not apply to criminals and the dangerously mentally ill. Writing for the conservative majority in the landmark Supreme Court case, District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the court struck down the D.C. gun ban, Justice Antonin Scalia stated, "Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill...or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms." In other words, Justice Scalia affirmed that laws preventing criminals and the dangerously mentally ill from obtaining firearms do not infringe on the Second Amendment.

    As you know, I recently introduced an amendment, along with Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), to the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013 (S. 649). Our amendment had three parts. The first was to improve state compliance with the existing National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The second part was to expand background checks to commercial sales at gun shows or through the internet. These first two parts of our amendment were designed to make it more difficult for criminals and dangerously mentally ill persons to acquire firearms. The third part would have provided law abiding citizens with expanded opportunities to exercise their Second Amendment Rights.

    With regard to the first part of the amendment, NICS relies on states to provide records of persons who should not possess firearms. Compliance varies greatly with some states providing very few records. The amendment requires states to completely participate in NICS in order to be eligible for certain types of federal grant funding.

    Full state participation in NICS would help prevent the kind of tragedy that took place at Virginia Tech in 2007. Prior to that mass shooting, in which 32 people were murdered and 23 were injured, shooter Seung Hui Cho had been found mentally ill by a Virginia judge. However, Virginia did not submit that court record to NICS. The absence of this critical information in NICS enabled Cho to pass a background check and purchase the handguns he used for the shooting. This is one example of how the threat of gun violence can be reduced through improvement of the NICS system, a salient objective of the Manchin-Toomey amendment.

    The second part, expansion of background checks to other venues such as gun shows, is not a new idea. In the aftermath of the Columbine High School tragedy in 1999, the NRA supported expanding background checks at gun shows during consideration by the House of Representatives of the Mandatory Gun Show Background Check Act (H.R. 2122). I agreed with the NRA then, and so did many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who voted in favor of this legislation.

    Current law already requires a background check through NICS for all sales conducted through a federally licensed gun dealer. The Manchin-Toomey amendment would have required individuals seeking to purchase firearms from a non-dealer at a gun show to undergo the same background check as required for purchases from licensed dealers. The amendment would not have mandated "universal" background checks. Personal, non-commercial transfers would not have required background checks.

    The third part of our amendment would have been achieved through a number of measures. These measures included allowing active duty military service members to buy a gun in their home state and providing a new legal process for restoring the Second Amendment rights of veterans who, under current law, can be unfairly prevented from acquiring a firearm. Another benefit included protecting law abiding gun owners from arrest or detention by fixing interstate travel laws.

    Contrary to some reports, the amendment would not have created or enabled a national gun registry. I have always strongly opposed a gun registry, so our amendment prohibited the creation of a registry and would have established a new felony offense, punishable by a 15-year prison sentence, for any official who attempted to create a federal registry.

    Senator Manchin and I posted the text of our amendment on our websites on April 11, 2013, thereby providing six days for our colleagues and the public to review the 49-page measure before a vote. On April 17, 2013, despite bipartisan support and a 54-46 vote in favor, the amendment was defeated due to a 60-vote threshold that was agreed to by unanimous consent.

    I acknowledge that some will disagree with the Manchin-Toomey amendment. I am under no illusion that the amendment would necessarily prevent a determined criminal or dangerously mentally ill person from acquiring a firearm. No system can be 100 percent effective in denying firearms to those that should not have them, but that does not mean we should not try to improve the current system. In my view, keeping guns out of the hands of these people is not gun control, but common sense.

    Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.



    Pat Toomey
    U.S. Senator, Pennsylvania
  15. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    You smell that? Smells like fish......
  16. Not2ManyGuns

    Not2ManyGuns Member


    Great experiment!!!:cool:

    GOOD JOB!!!:)

    Due to the responses gotten in your experiment, I bet that most politicians play both sides of the debate and have two canned letters depending on what side of the debate the constituent is supporting as indicated in the constituent's letter. Kind of like talking out of both sides of their mouths.
  17. For those not convinced, proof that leftists can't be trusted to tell the truth.
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2014
  18. I was going to comment that at least you got a response from Toomey. You can't even get through to our other Senator, Casey's phones just ring off the hook, no one picks up and there's no answering machine to leave a message. But after hearing Toomey's two faced reply, depending on what he thinks you want to hear, I can't say he's any better than Casey. Probably worse, since he campaigned on 'conservative values'. I guess if it looks like a pile of excrement and it smells like a pile of excrement, it must be a pile of Toomey.
  19. Moestooge

    Moestooge Member

    I'm a politician. I'm also a pro-Jewish Nazi and a steak-loving vegetarian.
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2014