I guess that Mike Bloomberg got our Senator from Pittsburgh, Philly and other urban locales another slice of money.

He felt inspired to vomit more gun control rubbish at his constituents. Most of it is lurid crap about "gun violence". The more I read it, the more annoyed I felt.

Quite frankly, the Odessa shooting underscored the urgent need to expand the background checks system. The killer was legally prohibited from buying or possessing a weapon because he had been involuntarily committed for a serious mental illness.
So how did he buy it, and why would such a law matter?

It shouldn't matter whether you buy a gun in a store (where a check is required), online or at a gun show (where they frequently aren't required). If you're buying a weapon in a commercial transaction, it's just common sense for the seller to check to make sure you're not prohibited from owning a firearm.
Common sense? Says who? Mike Bloomberg? The Giffords/Brady Campaign gang?

This change in law is supported by more than 90% of Americans, including 85% of gun owners and even an overwhelming majority of National Rifle Association members. In Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Connecticut and the rest of America, background checks are not controversial.
I have never been polled as a member of the NRA.

We don't have "Universal Background checks" in PA either. Cause they're too controversial.

For the time being, negotiations with the White House on background checks have come to a halt. But we think it's important to note how far this debate moved over the summer and fall, and how close we were to a bipartisan agreement.

Pat has come a long way from his Tea Party days. He's just like the rest of the Elitists who live in Washington DC.


Love to know the source of his "statistics' on "background" checks. Just his opinion, maybe?