Spokesman: Rubio supports comprehensive study of gun laws to prevent more mass shootings

posted at 7:31 pm on December 17, 2012 by Allahpundit

Think the frontrunner for the 2016 Republican nomination is going to get crosswise with the NRA by voting for new gun regs? Me neither.

The challenge for Rubio’s communications team: Craft a statement that screams “reasonable!” for the benefit of national swing voters while committing to nothing beyond respectful consideration. Here’s what they came up with.

“In the aftermath of the unspeakable tragedy in Newtown, Sen. Rubio, like millions of Americans, is looking for public policy changes that would prevent such a horrible event from happening again,” spokesman Alex Conant said. “He remains a strong supporter of the Second Amendment right to safely and responsibly bear arms. But he has also always been open to measures that would keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. The challenge with gun laws is that by definition criminals do not follow the law. For example, Connecticut’s gun laws, some of the strictest in the nation, were not able to prevent this atrocity. Nevertheless, he supports a serious and comprehensive study of our laws to find new and better ways to prevent any more mass shootings.”

So, to sum up, he’s against criminals and lunatics possessing weapons and wants to do more to prevent lethal rampages. Reasonable! He also has an A rating from Gun Owners of America and a B+ from the NRA, which is an interesting story. Until 2006 he had an A from them too; then, after he became speaker of the state legislature, he voted for an NRA-backed bill to permit gun owners to bring their weapons to workplace parking lots. But because the bill was blocked on its first try by the Florida Chamber of Commerce and eventually was passed with compromise language, the NRA concluded that he hadn’t done enough as speaker to advance its agenda. The result was a new grade of B+, which sounds relatively high but in fact is relatively low by Senate Republican standards. According to WaPo’s spreadsheet, the only GOPers with a worse grade are Susan Collins, Dan Coats, and Mark Kirk; meanwhile, fully ten Democrats have a higher rating than B+, which tells you what Obama’s up against in trying to get a bill passed here.

A man with a B+ from the NRA will be eager to impress conservative primary voters with his commitment to the cause so I’m trying to imagine a bill that Reid could bring up which might conceivably earn Rubio’s vote. Maybe, given what the statement says about keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong people, he’d support extending background checks to private gun sales? As recently as two years ago, his spokesman confirmed that he supports “reasonable restrictions” like background checks and waiting periods. But for Rubio to vote yes, Reid would likely have to float it as a separate bill; if he jammed it into some sort of omnibus gun control package, Rubio will obviously vote no on grounds that it goes too far. In fact, that’d be the optimal outcome for him. He’d get to give a floor speech alluding to “some good ideas” in the Democratic bill (reasonable!) before explaining why he must, alas, vote no to protect the rights of gun owners. And why not? A bill requiring background checks for private sales would have nothing to do with Sandy Hook. After all, Lanza didn’t get his guns that way. Whatever the Democrats propose is all but guaranteed to be disconnected from the actual facts of the horror that inspired the policy chatter this weekend, right down to the fact that mass shootings are not, in fact, becoming more frequent in the U.S., so if your top priority is addressing what happened in Newtown, you might as well vote no. The only measure related to Lanza’s M.O. that might come up is a ban on high-capacity magazines, and that may not be something Rubio goes for. His thinking on this subject seems, quite correctly, to focus on better screening of gun owners, not tinkering with the weapons themselves. The question is, if Reid floats a ban on high-capacity magazines and nothing more, would that be a “small” enough incursion that some Republicans (if not Rubio) would feel politically safe voting for it?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Release the hounds!!

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 17, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Hounds released. I smell a RINO.

bgibbs1000 on December 17, 2012 at 7:34 PM

So, he`s out for 2016 I`m guessin`.

ThePrez on December 17, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Support study. Have study find banning guns would change nothing. Fine by me.

alchemist19 on December 17, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Last Friday in Newtown (and every day, in every town in America) the existence – on the books NOW – of more than twenty THOUSAND gun laws (20,000+) did NOT save even one innocent life.
not. one.

However, at the Portland Mall shooting, a citizen named Nick Meli who had a legal gun, was able to confront the murdering shooter who then killed himself – not more innocents.

Oh you haven’t heard about that?
You mean the Obama/Gun Grab / Lame Stream Media chose not to tell you THAT story (including dumbass Scarborough on MessDNC)?
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clacka

Are you curious enough to wonder why?

So now please remind me why we need more laws?

HammerNH on December 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Put mental patients in mental hospitals. Problem fixed.

TX-96 on December 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

The challenge for Rubio’s communications team: Craft a statement that screams “reasonable!” for the benefit of national swing voters while committing to nothing beyond respectful consideration. Here’s what they came up with.

Swing voters- Is that what we are calling the moochers, parasites, and takers these days?

Rubio’s communications team has a bigger challenge. Pander to the middle without alienating people who actually would vote for him. His less than wholehearted defense of the Constitution along with his clear advocacy for amnesty will be hard for devoted conservates to swallow.

Happy Nomad on December 17, 2012 at 7:39 PM

TX-96 on December 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Agreed…as long as autism isn’t considered a ‘mental illness’…because it’s not.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 17, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Put mental patients in mental hospitals. Problem fixed.

TX-96 on December 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

I agree, but I don’t think we can afford to build enough mental hospitals to house every leftist idiot in the country.

bgibbs1000 on December 17, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Put mental patients in mental hospitals. Problem fixed.

TX-96 on December 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

But so many of them are in Congress!

Happy Nomad on December 17, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Et tu, Marco?!

MaiDee on December 17, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Support study. Have study find banning guns would change nothing. Fine by me.

alchemist19 on December 17, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Unfortunately, that’s not how it works … in the real world, it goes something like this (and Rubio knows it) …

Support study. Ignore facts. Have study find banning guns would change nothing everything.

This is just ONE MORE REASON to not trust Rubio.

Pork-Chop on December 17, 2012 at 7:40 PM

No big deal.

KCB on December 17, 2012 at 7:40 PM

HammerNH on December 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Of the multiple outlets where the Aurora shooter could have gone, he picked the one theater with a no CCW policy. Not a coincidence.

Happy Nomad on December 17, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Think the frontrunner for the 2016 Republican nomination

Selwyn Duke at American Thinker was right. There will never ever ever again be a conservative GOP nominee for president. Rubio’s now the Next In Line…only thing is, the GOP’s pretty much dead.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Is there actually anything objectionable here? All he’s committed to is, “support[ing] a comprehensive study”. Nothing more.

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Nevertheless, he supports a serious and comprehensive study of our laws to find new and better ways to prevent any more mass shootings.”

Like what? We have over 20,000 gun laws. There remains an inverse correlation between restrictions and crime. “Nevertheless” my as*. Put up or shut up, grandstanding little RINO.

rrpjr on December 17, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Didn’t his parents come from a place that has strict gun laws?

Rio Linda Refugee on December 17, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Craft a statement that screams “reasonable!” for the benefit of national swing voters while committing to nothing beyond respectful consideration.

Which, by the way, was the Romney campaign in a nutshell.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Laws are things that law-abiding people follow.I say let the congress just pass a new law banning Evil and very bad people then we will not have anymore crime.We can then live like Andy Taylor in mayberry and the people who still want a gun.Well they can do like Barney .Have a old six shooter and 1 bullet.

logman1 on December 17, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Hmmmmm. I’ll be impressed when the first Senator proposes a bill that requires mandatory firearms training for all school principals and assistant principals and a gun safe in every school office. Imagine the result if Dawn Hochsprung had been able to confront Lanza with a Kel-Tec in the hallway that day instead of just her best teacher voice. I’ll start holding my breath now.

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Support study. Have study find banning guns would change nothing. Fine by me.

alchemist19 on December 17, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Might be but I’m guessing that’s not the way its going to turn out.

clippermiami on December 17, 2012 at 7:45 PM

UGH!

The laws worked – he never was sold a gun. Yes his mother should have kept them better locked up especially if he exhibited signs of mental illness. However none of us know what happened in that house and never will.

If people are set on killing and are freaking nutbars like this guy was – they are going to find a way to kill period.

gophergirl on December 17, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Is there actually anything objectionable here? All he’s committed to is, “support[ing] a comprehensive study”. Nothing more.

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Not to libs like you, certainly not. Another GOP “frontrunner” giving off the Loser Squish vibe must be delightful to you.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Didn’t his parents come from a place that has strict gun laws?

Rio Linda Refugee on December 17, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Yes and as I recall the government has had very little trouble with the populace since. Also the starvation diet keeps them fairly docile.

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Trollcot!

Knott Buyinit on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Et tu, Marco?!

MaiDee on December 17, 2012 at 7:40 PM

+1

A nation without leaders.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Pork-Chop on December 17, 2012 at 7:40 PM

One has to wonder if you trust anything. If you object to even the mere mention of applying some sort of scientific rigor to the question of American gun deaths, I really have to wonder what, beside the Bible of course, you actually believe.

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

If people are set on killing and are freaking nutbars like this guy was – they are going to find a way to kill period.

gophergirl on December 17, 2012 at 7:46 PM

During the year to June 2012 there were approximately 29,613 recorded offences involving knives or other sharp instruments, accounting for 7% of selected offences, a similar proportion to previous years.

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

We just don’t have enough studies yet.

Bmore on December 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Liberals love studies! And they love not listening to what the study comes to conclude.

amazingmets on December 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

+1

A nation without leaders.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

How have you been, Loretta?

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 7:46 PM

I’ll pose to you the same question I posed to Pork-Chop. If even mentioning some sort of inquiry into American gun deaths illicits this reaction, is there anyone, any institution, any field of science, you actually trust?

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

I wish El Marco the best of luck with the politics within his crumbling party.

Mr. Arrogant on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

We just don’t have enough studies yet.

Bmore on December 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Someone should appoint a commission to look into that. Hi B. :)

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Think the frontrunner for the 2016 Republican nomination is going to get crosswise with the NRA by voting for new gun regs? Me neither.

Minor point of order – Rubio is only the frontrunner for the 2016 nomination if Santorum doesn’t run. On the other hand, he will once again be completely out of step with the base, just like McCain (on amnesty) and Romney (on government-run health care) were, which means he will be the 2016 runner-up and the 2020 nominee.

Steve Eggleston on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Exactly.

Also look at Oklahoma City – no guns involved there.

gophergirl on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Bmore on December 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Well how many are there right now? Are you familiar with any?

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

One has to wonder if you trust anything. If you object to even the mere mention of applying some sort of scientific rigor to the question of American gun deaths, I really have to wonder what, beside the Bible of course, you actually believe.

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

If you’re a fan of “rigor”, would you happen to know the comparative gun-death stats in states with strict gun control laws versus states that are more lax in that regard? Let’s apply some scientific rigor here.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 7:50 PM

So how much taxpayer money will be needed to fund this “comprehensive study”? Which crony will get this funding? How much would I need to have donated to the President Choom re-election campaign to get this cushy job? This is a waste of time. The more I hear from Rubio, the less happy I am with him.

RoadRunner on December 17, 2012 at 7:50 PM

He remains a strong supporter of the Second Amendment right to safely and responsibly bear arms.

That’s NOT what the 2nd amendment says – I don’t recall any “safely and responsibly” provision … though Rubio’s into amnesty for illegals, and then some, so Rule of Law is not a big concern of his.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 17, 2012 at 7:50 PM

How have you been, Loretta?

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Enjoying the slow implosion. Still hoping for that Mayan thingie to come off, but I suspect they won’t deliver any more than The Sweet Meteor Of Death did.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Exactly.

Also look at Oklahoma City – no guns involved there.

gophergirl on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Where there’s a will, there’s a way:

A TEENAGER was attacked with broken glass during a fight in Hadleigh.The 17-year-old was slashed in the face following a punch up between several youths or young men.

It happened just off the High Street, in Homestead Road, at about 11.15pm on Friday November 23.

The teenager needed hospital treatment for a two-inch cut right through his cheek.

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:51 PM

I screwed up that ReWrite™ – somehow the 2020 got missed.

I blame Mondays and my lack of typing skills, but mostly my lack of typing skills.

Steve Eggleston on December 17, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Enjoying the slow implosion. Still hoping for that Mayan thingie to come off, but I suspect they won’t deliver any more than The Sweet Meteor Of Death did.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Life is one long, unbroken chain of disappointment these days…. :/

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Nevertheless, he supports a serious and comprehensive study of our laws to find new and better ways to prevent any more mass shootings.”

Great…another tap-dancing pol.

Thought you were one of the smart ones….way to tie youself in knots trying to capitalize.

alas…poor rubio.

I thought I knew you well.

Tim_CA on December 17, 2012 at 7:52 PM

“reasonable!”…. Bwahahahahahaha

Like the grope’n and radiat’n the TSA does to every ailine passander……

“reasonible”

like Berry boi have’n the power to assassinate people. or throw them in jail, forever

“reasonible”

like the slaughter of 50 million lives since 1973. Cause the Supreme Court could not find the protection of life any where in the constitution, the declaration of independence, 200 years of case law or the entire experience of human history.

I have a bridge for sale in New York… Anyone interested?

roflmmfao

donabernathy on December 17, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Rubio Supports 2016 Candidacy of Marco Rubio; Thinks All Guns Should Be Banned Except All Of Them

HitNRun on December 17, 2012 at 7:53 PM

What a fool, and, as already known, a snotty one too.

ernesto, well, same old, different moment, on a different day…

Stupid people, from the left to the right, don’t deserve to be free any more.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 7:53 PM

His parents sacrificed for a spoiled idiotic brat.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Incidentally, you think Rubio and his circle know the MSM is going to take any opportunity to Palinize him?

HitNRun on December 17, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Uh, what gun bill? Oh yeah? A gun bill? Republicans shouldn’t even give such considerations the time of freakin’ day. We should be at least attempting to grab the narrative from the MSM and Dems: what’s causing these people to go berserk? Guns don’t make people do it. Republicans need to stop playing by the liberals rules and grow a pair. If Rubio wants to prove himself, he can start by being a full-time conservative, not this or that depending on the election year.

Dongemaharu on December 17, 2012 at 7:55 PM

I blame Mondays and my lack of typing skills, but mostly my lack of typing skills.

Steve Eggleston on December 17, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Well, I personally support a serious and comprehensive study of these phenomena to find new and better ways to prevent any more incidents of this nature.

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Libs aren’t interested a study, they are interested in jamming it through. Coersion. They’ll create the bill, and barky will hit the road with a backdrop of victims to feel sorry for. Maybe he can yank a few out of hospitals that still have bloody bandages.

wolly4321 on December 17, 2012 at 7:56 PM

Life is one long, unbroken chain of disappointment these days…. :/

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Might as well enjoy it and laugh at the liberals on the way down.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 7:56 PM

How about enforcing the laws on the books first…?

… Start with the border.

Then move onto Chicago…

Seven Percent Solution on December 17, 2012 at 7:56 PM

One has to wonder if you trust anything. If you object to even the mere mention of applying some sort of scientific rigor to the question of American gun deaths, I really have to wonder what, beside the Bible of course, you actually believe.

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

You swine, with apologies to the clean pigs, why did you insert the bible?

Also, when Edward Kennedy killed a woman with a car, did you and yours advocate the elimination of cars?

You are so dumb that, if it would hurt, we’d need shooting ear plugs to prevent hearing you.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 7:57 PM

high-capacity magazines

AP, can we stop using Dem language?

They are not high capacity magazines they are normal capacity magazines.

The AR-15 was designed to fire standard GI spec M-16 (shhhh!) 30 round mags. The 20 and 10 round mags are non standard.

The same holds for most AK variants.

Double stack 9mm and .40 cal pistols (there are many makes and models) typically have normal capacity magazines from 12-17 rounds.

CorporatePiggy on December 17, 2012 at 7:57 PM

OT: for those who new and listened to him, Ed Morrisy just reported that Frank Pastore passed away. :(

He was in a motor cycle accident last month and had been in a coma. He passed away today apparently.

RIP

jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 7:57 PM

How about enforcing the laws on the books first…?

… Start with the border.

Then move onto Chicago…

Seven Percent Solution on December 17, 2012 at 7:56 PM

The same snotty azz is for comprehensive amnesty. He and ernesto could run on a ticket in 2016.

Open borders and no guns, go figure!

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Republicans need to stop playing by the liberals rules and grow a pair. If Rubio wants to prove himself, he can start by being a full-time conservative, not this or that depending on the election year.

Dongemaharu on December 17, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Not going to happen. Rule of thumb: whoever is being pimped by the establishment and punditocracy is most likely not much of a conservative, period.

One has to wonder if you trust anything. If you object to even the mere mention of applying some sort of scientific rigor to the question of American gun deaths, I really have to wonder what, beside the Bible of course, you actually believe.

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

If you’re a fan of “rigor”, would you happen to know the comparative gun-death stats in states with strict gun control laws versus states that are more lax in that regard? Let’s apply some scientific rigor here.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Any “rigor” from you yet, ernesto? Or do you just believe blindly whatever DKos tells you to believe?

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Rubio will betray on amnesty and on gun control.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

OT: for those who new and listened to him, Ed Morrisy just reported that Frank Pastore passed away. :(

He was in a motor cycle accident last month and had been in a coma. He passed away today apparently.

RIP

jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Life is one long, unbroken chain of disappointment these days…. :/

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:52 PM

The Tim Scott appointment was a nice bright spot.

gophergirl on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

AWB is signed in 1994.

Murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants:

1994: 9.0
1995: 8.2
1996: 7.4
1997: 6.8
1998: 6.3
1999: 5.7
2000: 5.5
2001: 5.6
2002: 5.6
2003: 5.7
2004: 5.5

AWB expired in 2004.

Murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants:

2005: 5.6
2006: 5.7
2007: 5.6
2008: 5.4
2009: 5.0
2010: 4.8
2011: 4.7

The murder rate peaked at 10.2 per 100,000 inhabitants in 1980.

CCW laws:

In 1986: 1 state was UNRESTRICTED; 8 had SHALL issue; 26 had MAY issue; and 15 had NO issue.

In 1987: 1 UNRESTRICTED; 9 SHALL Issue; 24 MAY Issue; and 16 NO Issue.

In 1990: 1 UNRESTRICTED; 15 SHALL Issue; 20 MAY Issue; and 14 NO Issue.

In 1994: 1 UNRESTRICTED; 20 SHALL Issue; 17 MAY Issue; and 12 NO Issue.

In 1998: 1 UNRESTRICTED; 30 SHALL Issue; 17 MAY Issue; and 7 NO Issue.

In 2002: 1 UNRESTRICTED; 31 SHALL Issue; 11 MAY Issue; and 7 NO Issue.

In 2009: 2 UNRESTRICTED; 37 SHALL Issue; 9 MAY Issue; and 2 NO Issue.

In 2011: 4 UNRESTRICTED; 37 SHALL Issue; 8 MAY Issue; and 1 NO Issue (Illinois’ ban has just been struck down by the Appellate Court).

The murder rate has been falling in correlation to the the increase of CCW. I wonder why???? Hmmmmm….

Resist We Much on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

There will always be terrorists and gun toting nutjobs. Period.

Someone inform Bammie the wonder child.

fogw on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

One has to wonder if you trust anything. If you object to even the mere mention of applying some sort of scientific rigor to the question of American gun deaths, I really have to wonder what, beside the Bible of course, you actually believe.
ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Go away. You’re just a punk kid who still hasn’t grown up. Your childish leftist mindset is preventing you from living in the real world. No amount of new laws would have stopped this massacre. The only conceivable way you might obtain your gun free utopia is to use the Gov. to confiscate every single firearm from every person on the planet by violent force which isn’t gonna happen.

jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

This guy is, and always has been, a spineless douche bag and not even remotely conservative. He was a big supporter of SOPA until it no longer became politically favorable for him. And just get him talking about “immigration reform”.

Armin Tamzarian on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Gosh.. Rubio likes having four or so positions on issues. However, for whatever reason, he amuses me unlike Bobby Jindal… I guess charismatic politicians can get away with stuff..See Billy Jeff.

Illinidiva on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Rubio will betray on amnesty and on gun control.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Which is why more and more people are telling the GOP to FOAD.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Rubio also supports some kind of mass-amnesty coupled with a ill-defined-doesn’t-exist-Jeb Bush would love it-immigration solution down the road because it’s ‘the right thing to do.’

No thank you. One McCain was enough. A more well-spoken McCain is too much.

HopeHeFails on December 17, 2012 at 8:02 PM

One has to wonder if you trust anything. If you object to even the mere mention of applying some sort of scientific rigor to the question of American gun deaths, I really have to wonder what, beside the Bible of course, you actually believe.

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Strangely, scientific rigor is one thing lacking when it comes to the Absolute Shalls and gun control.

Data that you cannot refute…

The AWB or CCW Laws: Which Has Had More Of An Impact On The Murder Rate?

Resist We Much on December 17, 2012 at 8:02 PM

That’s NOT what the 2nd amendment says – I don’t recall any “safely and responsibly” provision … though Rubio’s into amnesty for illegals, and then some, so Rule of Law is not a big concern of his.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 17, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Yeah, wtf? “Safely?” This is how liberals change things. They introduce certain vocabulary into the dialogue and let it catch on. Before you know it, it’s it’s been incorporated into the national conversation. Just another example of Bill Whittle’s Stockholm Syndrome theory.

Dongemaharu on December 17, 2012 at 8:02 PM

This guy is, and always has been, a spineless douche bag and not even remotely conservative. He was a big supporter of SOPA until it no longer became politically favorable for him. And just get him talking about “immigration reform”.
Armin Tamzarian on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Says the guy who voted for Obama to spite Conservatives.

jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Gosh.. Rubio likes having four or so positions on issues. However, for whatever reason, he amuses me unlike Bobby Jindal… I guess charismatic politicians can get away with stuff..See Billy Jeff.

Illinidiva on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Rubio would be a disaster, and he’s charismatic primarily to political junkies and/or bloggers.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 8:03 PM

The Tim Scott appointment was a nice bright spot.

gophergirl on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Indeed, and libnotfree asked us to credit Obama, who has never accomplished anything in life, with Scott’s apptmt.

RWM, Obamaclaus is soooo apt!!!

———–

There will always be terrorists and gun toting nutjobs. Period.

Someone inform Bammie the wonder child.

fogw on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

He creates and loves them. Someone inform the stupid world of it.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 8:03 PM

So not only has Rubio proven to be anti-First Amendment, he’s anti-Second as well, and a neoconservative to boot.

No wonder he’s a GOP, so-called conservative darling.

Dante on December 17, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Put mental patients in mental hospitals. Problem fixed.

TX-96 on December 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Only some of them, the ones that exhibit aggression. There are a lot of really peaceful mental patients out there.

alwaysfiredup on December 17, 2012 at 8:03 PM

The Tim Scott appointment was a nice bright spot.

gophergirl on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Time will tell. :)

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Allah’s giving him WAY TOO much credit. Republicans as a breed have their spine surgically removed after being elected to office. People forget that GW actually would have signed the “assault weapons ban” extension if Cheney hadn’t worked hard behind the scenes to stop it from ever seeing the light of day. And he had an “A+” grade from the NRA.

Raquel Pinkbullet on December 17, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Someone should appoint a commission to look into that. Hi B. :)

cynccook on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Yes. That will solve it. ; )

Well how many are there right now? Are you familiar with any?

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

A study to study the amount of studies? Excellent idea! Our Federal government is certainly up to the task. ernesto, you are so smart. Would you be interested in heading up the study? Google is your friend and all. I don’t do research for anyone. Study up little man.

Bmore on December 17, 2012 at 8:04 PM

toldja guys. fish lips is a big time squish.

renalin on December 17, 2012 at 8:05 PM

The Tim Scott appointment was a nice bright spot.

gophergirl on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Savor it for it’s going to be one of the lone bright spots for the foreseeable future.

Raquel Pinkbullet on December 17, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Strangely, scientific rigor is one thing lacking when it comes to the Absolute Shalls and gun control.

Data that you cannot refute…

Resist We Much on December 17, 2012 at 8:02 PM

They only believe ficticious science on ‘climate change’. What a stupid name – of course the climate changes, all the time.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Which is why more and more people are telling the GOP to FOAD.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 8:01 PM

I don’t think the GOP can do any good anymore. They have become Democrats and don’t fundamentally disagree with anything the left wants.

It’s all just words with them.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

I had not read that before. Sad…

jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Study away. Just don’t come up with knee jerk reactions that will solve nothing, but make the irrational feel better about themselves. Like our resident trolls appear to be advocating.

besser tot als rot on December 17, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Well how many are there right now? Are you familiar with any?

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

The constitution and the SC – check them out sometime.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 8:08 PM

He may have been better than Charlie Crist, but I am really starting to dislike “Mr. Comb-over.”

bw222 on December 17, 2012 at 8:08 PM

RWM – congratulations on your prescience about T. Scott.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 8:10 PM

If even mentioning some sort of inquiry into American gun deaths illicits this reaction, is there anyone, any institution, any field of science, you actually trust?

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 7:49 PM

To trust is unscientific.

besser tot als rot on December 17, 2012 at 8:10 PM

I told you two years ago this guy was a squish!!!!

NOMARCO 2016

PappyD61 on December 17, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Resist We Much on December 17, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Wouldn’t Rubio’s “comprehensive study” find the same thing, if this is true? Why would you object to merely studying, if you are so certain of the truth?

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Rubio will betray on amnesty and on gun control.

sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

And many other issues to pander to the media.

bw222 on December 17, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Dante on December 17, 2012 at 8:03 PM

+1 You are fully right, except that he better not be a GOP ‘darling’. He is a snotty kid who needs to grow up.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Money quote:

The challenge with gun laws is that by definition criminals do not follow the law. For example, Connecticut’s gun laws, some of the strictest in the nation, were not able to prevent this atrocity.

Beyond that, hey, let’s appoint a national commission to study whether we should have a national commission to study the issue or not.

petefrt on December 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

ernesto on December 17, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Wasting dough for what is already known, hard earned dough, stolen from the taxpayers.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Rubio would be a disaster, and he’s charismatic primarily to political junkies and/or bloggers.

ddrintn on December 17, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Good Lord, ain’t that the truth. He’s the perfect Mike Murphy professional politician: a well-spoken, squishy centrist. I really think their purpose on earth is to avoid offending “intellectuals.”

Dongemaharu on December 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Like everyone else I was sickened by he events over the last month but damn it the politicians have lost their minds jumping on the gun control issue. I never thought I would be calling Rubio a spineless RINO but his actions have proven me wrong.

I just received notice today that one of my many background checks with the federal government was adjudicated favorably. That background check took over 4 months to complete.

Since I am not law enforcement I can not carry a firearm in a gun free zone according to federal law (can’t bring one into DC where I work despite a 4 month background check, but Senator Rubio can). Yet somehow I am a bad guy/mentally unstable for owning guns that “needs to be banned.”

After hearing the news on Fri I went into the datacenter to tear up a bit and wish I was in CT to at least try to do something to stop this brutality. Taking away my guns wont stop this madness from occurring if anything I am part of the solution not the problem.

F15Mech on December 17, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3