Schumer Targets 2A with ‘Real, Effective Common Sense Gun Safety Measures’

Sen. Charles Schumer is photographed during a spotlight interview with The Journal News editorial board, Harrison, Jan. 18, 2012. ( Melissa Elian/The Journal News )

Sen. Charles Schumer is photographed during a spotlight interview with The Journal News editorial board, Harrison, Jan. 18, 2012. ( Photo: Melissa Elian/The Journal News)

U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer, an ardent gun-grabber, is after the Second Amendment once again, this time with “real, effective common sense gun safety measures.”

Schumer (D-NY) unveiled his latest gun-control salvo in a press release Monday.

“If there is anything that the massacres in South Carolina, Newtown, Virgina Tech, Aurora and so many other places have taught us, it’s that we should be doing everything in our power to prevent weapons from falling into the hands of hateful, evil-doers and the mentally disturbed,” said Schumer.

“It makes no difference when guns are sold or who are selling them—we must prevent deadly weapons from falling into the wrong hands,” he continued. “Our children have seen far too many tragedies in the country involving guns and weapons, and now is the time to put forth real, effective common sense gun safety measures that can save future innocent lives from being taken, without taking away any existing rights.”

Among the gun-control measures the senator is proposing include: a universal background check bill that would criminalize private transfers between law-abiding citizens, a ban on so-called “large capacity magazines,” a bill that would appropriate taxpayer dollars to pay for gun-control research, among others.”

“I acknowledge the right—enshrined in the Second Amendment and the Heller decision—of American citizens to purchase and bear arms, however, just as the First Amendment comes with responsibilities and limits to protect public safety, the Second Amendment does as well,” argued Schumer. “We have to make sure that we as a country are safe and that everyone’s right are respected.”

Schumer’s track record — author of the Brady Bill, lead sponsor of Clinton’s Crime bill, which banned many widely popular and commonly owned black rifles — makes it abundantly clear that he is not interested in anything but rolling back the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. Don’t believe his “common sense measures that can save future lives” B.S. for a minute.

A video from 2012, Schumer discusses gun control:

{ 27 comments… add one }
  • mtman2 November 12, 2016, 12:17 pm

    Bottom line inconfronting anti 2nd-Amendment RIGHTS as written:
    1) Tell them when illegal drug control measures succeed then snd only then would any true American or thinking person even contemplate such nonsense. This pointnor could ever happen- so makes it a moot point-!

    2) It was set forth from the discription of “certain unalienable Rights” in the very Bill of RIGHTS that allowed the Constitution to even be ratified by the Sovereign States.
    So therefore cannot be touched as it clearly states:
    “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”
    If it can be touched- then so can’t everything = which leaves nothing.
    Lets get rid of ALL the flying monkey people in OUR system now that the Wicked Witch is dead(or on her way to federal prison).

    Trump CANNOT do it all alone-!!!!!!
    WE must all keep voting the socialist/statist creeps out in every ensuing election and WE can do it to actually- ” Make America Great Again”.

    WE have the ingenius system set up by the Founders for us to use.
    The llate Bill Nojay pointed out that only 7% of NY gun owners showed up to vote in the last two elections that put and kept Commie Cuomo in office.
    So who’s fault is it really-??? Now they have super restrictive gun laws etc.
    Can’t blame the statist’s any more than a rat being a rat- they must be dealt with or they will take over the farm.
    It’s as simple as all Constitutionalist’s showing up and voting.
    WE truly still are the Silent/Moral Majority and why the Far-Left must cheat ~!

  • studi30 July 9, 2015, 10:22 am

    Every one of those far left, libterd nuts like Loughner and Holmes would have been prevented from purchasing their weapons if the HPAA laws didn’t exist. HPAA protects doctor/patient confidentiality, preventing the doctor from reporting their patient to the NICS System. The National Instant Check System is called at point of purchase by a gun dealer at a gun show or store for an instant yes or no on the sale. The NICS is run by the FBI (so Slummer, there is a background check being done)

  • OFBG July 8, 2015, 10:39 pm

    We all know the fallacy of “common sense…measures” but the real concern here is the Senator’s use of the term “gun safety” – just as the Bloomberg groups do – to attempt to disguise his efforts at gun controls, bans, registration, and ultimate confiscation.

  • Pat Finnie July 7, 2015, 7:43 am

    Chuck Schumer is an unwiped butthole spewing what unwiped butthole spew. What would you expect ?

  • Gregory Hawkins July 6, 2015, 9:06 pm

    Whenever you hear a liberal Democrat / communist politician use the terms “common sense legislation” or “we need to do this for the children”, you had better reach for a lubricant because you and your Constitutional Rights are about to be violated. The country doesn’t need more arbitrary Gun Control laws like the Unconstitutional proposals Chuck U. Schumer and his Democrat comrades are proposing. The country needs Crazy Person Control laws. We need laws that go after the real cause of mass shootings, the criminally insane. Our citizens need to be protected from unstable, insane people who can’t function in civilized society and who all too often use firearms when they finally snap and run amok. Schumer only wants to go after the tool that the lunatics use but NOT the actual lunatics using it. The unstable members of our society need to be identified, locked up and kept behind bars or in rubber rooms until they expire. Sane, gun owning citizens do not misuse firearms; crazy people do. Why penalize 99.99% of law-abiding American gun owners for the crazed actions of a miniscule number of insane losers? Schumer and his ilk just don’t get it.

    • Captain Bob April 29, 2016, 1:29 pm

      Well said, Gregory. My key to mark these morons as anti-gun is, whenever they say, “I support the 2nd Amendment BUT…” or in Shitmer’s case, “…HOWEVER…”, you know that they are lying about supporting it. Either you do believe in the 2nd Amendment THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN or you don’t. You can’t say you do and then say you don’t in the same sentence separated by a “but” or “however”. It just shows you up for a slimeball politician who has to try to pander to both sides. C’mon Shitmer, why not be honest and just come out and say that you want to ban all guns?

  • WinchesterMan July 6, 2015, 6:30 pm

    In ole Ckuckles wanting to have “common sense” gun laws must surely mean that our founding fathers had no common sense when drafting the second amendment! Chuck, I’ve studied the founding fathers. The founding fathers were the defenders of freedom. Chuck, you are no founding father. Being Jewish, I would think you would want every freedom loving person to be armed. But no, you are more like Hitler, trying to disarm us all!!! Probably with similar motives.

  • zippy July 6, 2015, 4:07 pm

    Gee, Chuck all those killings were committed by your constituents. Democrats.
    Or as I like to term the party of losers. pro/lib/commie/nazi/loser/defeatocrats.

  • John July 6, 2015, 2:39 pm

    Democrats don’t care about gun safety. What they truly care about is disarming Americans. There are more people killed by DUI accidents per year than gun accidents. But you don’t see the Democrats coming out for legislation to require breathalyzer on cars. All cars! Blow before you go! If they can’t tax it or control it they don’t want it.

    • CJ August 5, 2015, 8:51 pm

      John, don’t hold your breath, the breathalyzers in cars is already being proposed by another liberal congress critter…

  • Bob July 6, 2015, 1:28 pm

    This is nothing more than another ploy to get ‘universal’ gun registration(which will turn into confiscation) and giving the government the authority to say who can or cannot own a gun.

    • Captain Bob April 29, 2016, 1:31 pm

      …and the government will then just say, “no one but the military and the police…”

  • Dean Lefebvre July 6, 2015, 1:18 pm

    I believe that there is absolutely no question as to the meaning of our 2nd amendment that we have the constituional right to own guns.

    I would rather see a Federal Law that makes owning a gun illegally a federal crime with a minimum prison sentence of 5 years and that sentence would increase to 10 yearrs in pridon if caught committing a crime with an illegal firearm.

    No indeterminate sentences it would be 5 and 10 years no parole etc.

    Bill Oriley mentioned this about a week or so ago and I agree. Sentence those carrying a gun illegally to minimum federal prison sentences and illegal firearms and those who use them will be taken off our streets and perhaps our society will be a bit more safe.

    Also I do not have an issue with background checks nor should any other legal gun owner

    • bill kuhlmann July 6, 2015, 4:08 pm

      they tried that back in the 80s in the peoples republic of Kalifornexico. sadly the only thing It did was to give criminal defense shysters a bargaining chip for a plea to a reduced charge. it gave the district attorneys a conviction and the shyster got a reduced charge and lesser sentence for his client. as always the legal system and government interference ruined what would have been a good law.

    • Joe McHugh July 10, 2015, 7:34 pm

      One might call Charles Schumer the Devil’s spawn, but that would be too kind. The greatest lie the Devil ever told to mankind, was that he didn’t exist. The greatest lie Schumer ever told, was that he is not trying to ban all private gun ownership.

      OK, I must apologize for not doing more to defeat “Little Chuckie” at the polls. That’s what we upstate New Yorkers like to call the commissar from New York City. obama is worse, only because he is in a position to do more damage to American citizens.

      If America ever collapses into economic chaos, the guns that Schumer fears so much, will be used to hunt down “pests”.
      Oh, did some of the readers take that to mean the members of the liberal elite? That’s just crazy talk, I don’t even own a gun, and my associates don’t have firearms either. Honestly, I don’t understand the way liberals think sometimes.

      There, that ought to mollify the good people at the N.S.A. center, who are monitoring this forum.

    • Captain Bob April 29, 2016, 1:37 pm

      Dean: Regarding “background checks” I, too have no problem with even “Universal” background checks IF they eliminated page 3 of the 4473 form when a buy or transfer is done. That is the page where the info (Make, model, serial #, type, caliber) is recorded. THIS is the dreaded gun registration and really has nothing to do with a background check. Drop that page and do the check on the PERSON but don’t record the gun info. This is the “back door” gun registration that is feared. With Universal BG checks required, in a few generations (anti-gunners are very patient), the gov’t will know who has every gun and THEN confiscation can begin.

      • mtman2 November 12, 2016, 2:42 pm

        Bottom line inconfronting anti 2nd-Amendment RIGHTS as written:
        1) Tell them when illegal drug control measures succeed then snd only then would any true American or thinking person even contemplate such nonsense. This pointnor could ever happen- so makes it a moot point-!

        2) It was set forth from the discription of “certain unalienable Rights” in the very Bill of RIGHTS that allowed the Constitution to even be ratified by the Sovereign States.
        So therefore cannot be touched as it clearly states:
        “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”
        If it can be touched- then so can’t everything = which leaves nothing.
        Lets get rid of ALL the flying monkey people in OUR system now that the Wicked Witch is dead(or on her way to federal prison).

        Trump CANNOT do it all alone-!!!!!!
        WE must all keep voting the socialist/statist creeps out in every ensuing election and WE can do it to actually- ” Make America Great Again”.

        WE have the ingenius system set up by the Founders for us to use.
        The llate Bill Nojay pointed out that only 7% of NY gun owners showed up to vote in the last two elections that put and kept Commie Cuomo in office.
        So who’s fault is it really-??? Now they have super restrictive gun laws etc.
        Can’t blame the statist’s any more than a rat being a rat- they must be dealt with or they will take over the farm.
        It’s as simple as all Constitutionalist’s showing up and voting.
        WE truly still are the Silent/Moral Majority and why the Far-Left must cheat ~!

  • RetNavet July 6, 2015, 12:02 pm

    Chuck U. Schummer is probably in the top-twenty five most vile waste of human flesh masquerading as a duly elected public servant. The only thing that keeps him from breaking into the top-ten is his incompetence to effect as much of his sinister world view as he would like to.
    Besides that he looks like what a rat would if it took on human form and is probably the biological father of that little bastard Anthony Weiner…they do bear a disgusting resemblance.

  • bigtex52 July 6, 2015, 11:13 am

    Chuck Schumer and the words “Common Sense” don’t belong in the same sentence. This liberal clown lies to us about respecting the Heller Decision and the Second Amendment and then expects us to ignore his past actions.

  • MarylandShooter July 6, 2015, 11:01 am

    After these sad events, grabbers want to jump in and tighten the laws making it harder for law-abiding folks to enjoy a civil right guaranteed, like all the other Bill of Rights.

    Here is a sure show-stopper. Ask what law would have prevented THIS killing. In this instant case, no law would have made a difference. The firearm was legally purchased. Nothing they’ve proposed or will propose would have stopped this or even the last 3 tragic shootings.

    They only use them as an excuse to carve yet another segment of the population away from a natural right – the right to self defense.

  • gapineman July 6, 2015, 8:42 am

    I believe Will Rogers said, “Common sense ain’t all that common.” SHUMNER has demonstrated time and again that he seriously lacks common sense…to him that means repealing the 2nd and handcuffing law abiding citizens while allowing the criminal and mentally ill free reign.

  • Wil Ferch July 6, 2015, 8:31 am

    His own duplicitous statement,,,, ” We have to make sure that we as a country are safe and that everyone’s right are respected.”
    OK…what about the rights of law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves and their family ? Oh….that group and that group’s rights don’t quite carry the same weight, it seems.

    Correct….when a lawmaker is quoted saying “common-sense”…..this is extremely offensive as it positions that person in a morally elevated position before the counter-argument even starts ( as if “the opposition” on purpose follows nonsensical approach…how very offensive). It is almost always stated by liberal Democrats….100% ….just look !

  • JiminGA July 6, 2015, 6:27 am

    Anytime a politician used the phrases “fairness” or “common sense” you know they are lying. Because their proposals are neither fair nor common sense. There’s an old saying…”common sense ain’t so common”.

  • Mike Hunt July 6, 2015, 3:31 am

    Just another braindead libtard squawker

  • DRAINO July 4, 2015, 6:04 pm

    There is absolutely no common sense in thinking that more signed pieces of paper will keep criminals from breaking the law. A fools errand, I believe its called. Common sense is realizing that it takes good guys with guns to stop bad guys with guns. It just doesn’t get any simpler than that.

  • Mark N. July 1, 2015, 3:36 am

    How do “large capacity magazine bans” prevent guns from “getting into the wrong hands”? How does research on “gun violence” keeps guns form “getting into the wrong hands”? Who decides what are “the wrong hands”? Will it be necessary, based on the fact that mass murders are committed (mostly) by young adults with no criminal record who successfully pass background checks to undergo mental health screening? Interviews with the local constabulary to see if that person “really needs” a gun? Isn’t this simply a call for the same repressive “may issue” purchasing permit laws now applied in New Jersey to be applied to the whole nation? You know, the ones that require the police to issue a purchase permit in 60 or 90 days that the police (conveniently) have never heard of, and that recently got a woman killed because she could not buy a gun to defend herself against an abusive ex-boyfriend against whom she has a restraining order?

    That would be “yes.”

    • Captain Bob April 29, 2016, 1:43 pm

      No.
      It doesn’t.
      The ant-gunners.
      Nope.
      Likely.
      Yes.
      Absolutely, yes.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend