• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Good Friday Massacre

JimMullinsWVCDL

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
676
Location
Lebanon, VA
imported post

Good Friday Massacre: Governor Manchin Vetoes Both Pro-Gun Bills Passed by the Legislature, Exposes Himself as an Anti in Disguise

For years, the biggest problem West Virginia gun owners have faced at the Legislature has been a cadre of lying, deceitful politicians who tell their constituents they're pro-gun, give the "right" answers to candidate surveys, and then proceed to stab gun owners in the back by stifling the passage of good legislation andbill rationing (limiting not only gun rights but many other issue groups to one or two, often minuscule, bills each year.)

Today, the systematic betrayal West Virginia gun owners have received from our elected officials reached new heights. Today, Governor Joe Manchin vetoed both pro-gun bills that managed to pass the Legislature this year: HB 4521, the gun sales tax holiday bill, and SB 515, the "Anti-Bloomberg Bill."

Consistent with the constant back-stabbing West Virginians have suffered at the hands of our elected leaders, it was in a way appropriate that Governor Manchin chose today, Good Friday, to cast these vetoes. Governor Manchin has until April 7 to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature. He could have vetoed the bills yesterday. He could have vetoed them Monday. He could have vetoed them Tuesday. He could have vetoed them Wednesday. Instead, he vetoed both of them today.

For more, click here.
 

JimMullinsWVCDL

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
676
Location
Lebanon, VA
imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:
Any chance the state legislature can override either of the vetos?
No. The session ended March 20. West Virginia's constitution does not provide for a "veto session," a poll by mail, or carrying it over to the next session. The process will have to begin anew next year.

SB 515 was a slightly modified version of one of our bills. We supported the sales tax bill, but did not consider it among the most important issues that needed attention. Despite the brevity (2 pages) and relative innocuousness of this bill, SB 515 has served a very useful purpose in smoking out a few antis who have evaded apprehension to date.

The great disappointment this year was the lack of action on a plethora of pro-gun bills that would have addressed far more important issues.
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

All the damn unions in WV helps get these goons elected.

I have talked with so many coal miners who always vote for anti-gun democrats because his union leader said "they will help keep you employed, never-mind that politicians stance on guns- thats just a talking point" and they always fall for it and vote for those morons.
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

colorado slick wrote:
mortonrml wrote:
Amen with Sig229 Daw gone UMWA dumbheads

That's one of the reasons I left West Virginia years ago and moved to Colorado.



Colorado Slick

Good choice.
I used to live in Ft. Collins. That a fine state. Although there is one gun law in CO that is horrible.
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

colorado slick wrote:
What law is that? It seems to me we are doing just fine here. I live in Windsor, about 15 miles south east of Fort Collins.

Colorado
Colorado has a law which many of the left wing states have.

The CO state police firearms division, who does the background check has a rule that if a person was adjudicated as a juvenile (NOT convicted) of an offense they cannot buy a firearm. Keep in mind that the legal definition of "adjudicated" is a very very gray term.
Adjudicated means "any court proceeding with an outcome"

So, lets say you were 12 years old and got into a small petty fight with the neighborhood bully and both of you were given juvenile citations. You go to court and the juvenile judge give you each a month of probation just to teach you a small lesson in life. Even when your 80 years old, you will not be allowed to buy a firearm from a FFL in CO.

Basically, even though you were NEVER convicted of a felony, you are treated as though you are and you lose your right to buy a gun through a FFL. Even though they have a 100% clean adult record.
Now, I nor anyone else here on this board want criminals in possession of firearms.

But that rule is completely ridiculous and un-american. When a child makes a mistake, there is a reason he/she is sent to juvenile court. There are many on this board who made a legal mistake when they were young, and learned from that mistake and made a wonderful upstanding law abiding life for themselves. There is no reason the CO state police should strip them of their 2nd amendment rights.

Yet, a person with an adult record who was convicted of drunk driving, petty assault and even possession of small quantities drugs and they are still allowed to buy a gun through an FFL!

The other states that have the same rule are Maryland, New Jersey and Massachusetts. I believe California also has the same statute.

Its a disgusting abuse of power.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
imported post

Sig229 wrote:
The CO state police firearms division, who does the background check has a rule that if a person was adjudicated as a juvenile (NOT convicted) of an offense they cannot buy a firearm. Keep in mind that the legal definition of "adjudicated" is a very very gray term.

The other states that have the same rule are Maryland, New Jersey and Massachusetts. I believe California also has the same statute.

This law is proof that the legislatures in these states believe in their heart of hearts that ALL the subjects in their little serfdoms are, FROM BIRTH, criminals, and cannot be trusted.

Fascism comes, all too often, carrying a scroll...
 

JimMullinsWVCDL

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
676
Location
Lebanon, VA
imported post

This thread is going way off topic. To get it back on topic, last week, the Legislature began a special session. One of the items on the agenda was SB 1005, a revised version of SB 515 from the regular session. Both houses passed SB 1005, which will be sent to the Governor soon. The Legislature is now in recess until June 7.
 
Last edited:

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

WVCDL wrote:
This thread is going way off topic. To get it back on topic, last week, the Legislature began a special session. One of the items on the agenda was SB 1005, a revised version of SB 515 from the regular session. Both houses passed SB 1005, whichwill be sent to the Governor soon. The Legislature is now in recess until June 7.
Thanks, keep us updated!
 

Mini14

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
92
Location
, ,
colorado slick wrote:
Colorado has a law which many of the left wing states have.

The CO state police firearms division, who does the background check has a rule that if a person was adjudicated as a juvenile (NOT convicted) of an offense they cannot buy a firearm. Keep in mind that the legal definition of "adjudicated" is a very very gray term.
Adjudicated means "any court proceeding with an outcome"

So, lets say you were 12 years old and got into a small petty fight with the neighborhood bully and both of you were given juvenile citations. You go to court and the juvenile judge give you each a month of probation just to teach you a small lesson in life. Even when your 80 years old, you will not be allowed to buy a firearm from a FFL in CO.

Basically, even though you were NEVER convicted of a felony, you are treated as though you are and you lose your right to buy a gun through a FFL. Even though they have a 100% clean adult record.
Now, I nor anyone else here on this board want criminals in possession of firearms.

But that rule is completely ridiculous and un-american. When a child makes a mistake, there is a reason he/she is sent to juvenile court. There are many on this board who made a legal mistake when they were young, and learned from that mistake and made a wonderful upstanding law abiding life for themselves. There is no reason the CO state police should strip them of their 2nd amendment rights.

Yet, a person with an adult record who was convicted of drunk driving, petty assault and even possession of small quantities drugs and they are still allowed to buy a gun through an FFL!

The other states that have the same rule are Maryland, New Jersey and Massachusetts. I believe California also has the same statute.

Its a disgusting abuse of power.

Something the woodshed worshippers need to consider, badly. Those who betray the 2cd Amendment for a doubled up piece of leather, they are traitors and enemies of freedom in my eyes. Vidkun Quisling has many devotees among us, and it behooves freedom lovers to stay eternally vigilant. Some of the most rabid antigunners, they think you should be allowed to flog your kids. I know who wants another assault weapons ban, and yet acts horrified that I as a
Christian am 100% pro-gun, yet adamantly condemn child abuse. Remember: Like minds cling together.
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
This thread is going way off topic. To get it back on topic, last week, the Legislature began a special session. One of the items on the agenda was SB 1005, a revised version of SB 515 from the regular session. Both houses passed SB 1005, whichwill be sent to the Governor soon. The Legislature is now in recess until June 7.
What was the point of this bill? :confused:
 
Top