Tom Coburn Supporting Registration?

[Bartholomew Roberts]

According to this article, Sen. Tom Coburn of OK, a GOA A+ rated candidate and the man ABC News called the single biggest obstacle to gun control said:

"“I think there’s lots of good things that can happen in terms of mental health screening and checks,” Coburn told KRMG-TV Friday.* “If you transfer your car, you have to have a license to transfer, it has to go through that. That’s a responsibility of freedom. I have no problems with us making sure that we don’t allow guns to get in the hands of either felons, or people who are a danger to themselves or other people. … I’m willing to work with Manchin and Schumer on that, and going to.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...out-background-check-bill/?wprss=rss_politics

Please contact the Senator and politely explain why this is a bad idea:

Senator Tom Coburn

Washington D.C.:
172 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-5754
Fax: 202-224-6008

Tulsa:
1800 South Baltimore
Suite 800
Tulsa, OK 74119
Main: 918-581-7651
Fax: 918-581-7195

Oklahoma City:
100 North Broadway
Suite 1820
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Main: 405-231-4941
Fax: 405-231-5051

Website form: http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=ContactForm

 

[alsaqr]

Coburns support for gun control ties in very well with your theory how the US senate will pass gun control. Senators who claim to be pro-gunners are now working with the anti-gunners to bring us "common sense" gun control.

Coburn would likely vote for universal background checks, a ban on high capacity "feeding devices" and another thing or two. He would vote against an "assault weapons" ban. Coburn would then come home and blow smoke about how he voted against an AWB.

Coburns office will hear from me on Monday.


http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=698637

 

[AlexanderA]

Coburn has already announced that he will retire at the end of his current term. That makes him immune from voter pressure.

 

[gc70]

People and politicians try to get ideas from what they think are analogous situations. And those who are not close to an issue and well informed may see false analogies.

Sell a car, sell a gun - the car has a registration that is transferred, so why not the gun? We have to point out why the two cases are different. The purpose for a car's registration is to enable taxation and not to limit who the car might be sold to. A gun is entirely different.

Write any politician who starts down the road of false analogies and let them know why they are misguided.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Not to mention that your right to own a car isn't expressly protected in the Bill of Rights.

 

[abajaj11]

Please call Coburn's office anyway. It can't hurt our cause.
The more calls the better. I will for sure.

 

[Cosmoline]

Coburn has not been an enemy, and I think it's a big mistake to try to Zumbo him now. Let's give the man a little bit of trust before launching an all-out attack. I'm also waiting to see if this is truly some kind of lame duck move by him or if he's speaking for other Republican Senators as well. We should know more early next week.

I suspect what's happening here is that the Republicans in the Senate and many in the House are looking to orchestrate a universal NICS drafted under their oversight to ensure it will not become registration. And ditch both the AWB and high cap bans in the process. It's a move I've been anticipating for several weeks now. And I'm personally torn on the issue. However much I dislike an end to face to face sales, there's a serious risk of NICS being expanded on the enemy's terms against our will if the midterms go badly. And much, much worse as well. So this is a potential time to steal thunder. IF it's done right. The problem with background checks has always been the potential for backdoor registration. That's something a GOP-approved bill could eliminate. But one passed after the Dems regain the house in 2014? Not so much. Those are the choices.

 

[abajaj11]

I listened to Coburn at a local radio interview. IMHO, he wants a creation of a better infrastructure where mentally ill folks can be fed into the NICS system.
I don't believe he is trying to sell us out on a UBC.
However, he may not be AWARE of the potential danger of the UBC: that it will give POTUS and Mr. Holder the impetus they need to demand and create a registry of who owns what, because that is the only way they will be able to monitor with any degree of effectiveness at all, that the law is being followed.

IMHO, we all need to call his office and point out we are OPPOSED STRONGLY to UBC in any form, and tell his aides why. They seem clueless when I talk to them, which worries me a bit.