Gun vote shows money is being used to buy and sell politicians

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • hibby North Salt Lake, UT
    May 23, 2013 12:02 p.m.

    "Americans suffered a severe disappointment with the recent defeat of a weakened gun control bill. In spite of the overwhelming approval of the public"


    If you poll people with really crappy polling questions you end up with meaningless data....which is what we saw with this bill.

    No one wants people being shot....however there are a lot of legitimate reasons why citizens are allowed to own guns and even the "evil" high capacity magazines.

    I'm sorry to burst your bubble but there are about 160 million Americans who don't agree with you.....even if you claim that they do.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    May 7, 2013 11:43 a.m.

    So many people still believe that money in politics is the problem. Nonsense. First of all, there is as much chance of getting money out of politics in our 1st Amendment country as there is getting oxygen out of the air. Plus, it was Obama who actually raised the most money in both 2008 and 2012 elections. Liberals seem to hate money only when it beats something they want. Otherwise they are pretty silent when their guy wins with it.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    May 6, 2013 5:05 p.m.

    Check out 'Joker Joe' Biden's face in this photo. Where is the big cheesy grin Joe?? Dang - another blow for socialism but a win for the second amendment!!

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    May 6, 2013 4:55 p.m.

    Bob apparently has no idea what the NRA does - what it stands for - how it has created over the years a nation wide gun safety campaign - and how it cherishes and protects our second amendment. Bob apparently would rather have a Communist like society where there are no rights to bear arms - no rights to protect you or your family. Let me correct something Bob said in his first paragraph - Bob said the public overwhelmingly wanted a gun ban. This is nonsense and completely untrue. Why Bob do you think even HARRY REID refused to vote for this gun ban legislation? Yes Harry Reid voted NO!! BECAUSE Bob the public overwhelmingly wanted NO GUN BANNING and politicians are smart enough to understand if they vote against the will of the people they lose elections. Barack Obama and his progressive brethren want a gun-less society in America and to realize this there are several steps that have to take place. The first step is to create deceptive legislation which opens the door to gun registration nationally and that is what this bill did - as it was first introduced. "Registration then confiscation" - NY Gov Cuomo.

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    May 6, 2013 1:38 p.m.

    The Real Maverick
    Orem, UT

    So many pro gun folks seem to condone the blatant bribery of our democracy. I wonder if you folks will still find this bribery acceptable on a future issue which you may disagree with?



    The double-standard shows their total disregard for honesty and a complete lack of integrity.

    Gadiantons took over the Nephite Government like this, and Likewise the once righteous Nephites fanned the flames of their total destrution.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    May 6, 2013 11:04 a.m.

    Re: ". . . voters blame Congress for ignoring the wishes of their own constituents . . . ."

    Yeah, they're called liberals. And, being a tiny minority of voters, they ought to get used to having their wishes ignored. Particularly on an issue in which so many Americans support the Constitution over modern liberal sophistry.

    But, complaining that the NRA's money bought a vote is the most egregious case of "pot calling kettle black" imaginable.

    Though liberals most commonly act through sneaky, covert networks of billionaire wannabee oligarchs and cynical, life-tenured politicos, and though they never publish either aims or funding, it's certainly fair to say that liberal politicos have been bought by way, WAY more than the NRA could ever afford to spend.

    And they STILL couldn't buy enough politicians to make their ineffectual anti-Constitutional, anti-American statement.

    Sometimes, democracy still works!

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    May 5, 2013 10:31 p.m.

    The polls were for background checks. They never included assault weapons and magazine capacity that were added at the last moment.

    Those wanting gun control tried to manipulate the vote by adding the most controversial sections after the polls.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    May 5, 2013 8:11 p.m.


    So many pro gun folks seem to condone the blatant bribery of our democracy. I wonder if you folks will still find this bribery acceptable on a future issue which you may disagree with? Will you still be supportive of our representatives throwing your views into the garbage can in favor of big special interest money?

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    May 5, 2013 6:06 p.m.

    "The failure of the background check bill is just another example of tyranny by the minority that has gripped this nation since the Republican Party has seceded control to its fringe"

    What a laugh, and wow, those sour grapes sure taste bitter don't they? I think the word tyranny, has a lot more to do with government TYRANTS (think of BHO and fellow dems) restricting freedoms, and removing rights, then a minority body and defectors preserving freedoms. From my view, this gun control bill was much more about imposing tyranny, then those who worked to defeat it! Besides, the unthinking leftist, nut fringe is far scarier then anybody on the right!

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    May 5, 2013 5:04 p.m.

    "Why assume the worst?"

    Not to assume the worst, just the most likely.

  • Another Perspective Bountiful, UT
    May 5, 2013 2:05 p.m.

    This is a very cynical letter to the editor.

    Its just as reasonable to assume that those who voted down these restrictions on law abiding gun owners did so because of their respect for the constitution.

    Why assume the worst?

  • DougS Oakley, UT
    May 5, 2013 2:04 p.m.

    Most, if not all, advocates for gun control want "Background Checks" made for potential gun owners. Why don't the want the same for potential (and sitting) Presidents?

  • Copy Cat Murray, UT
    May 5, 2013 1:02 p.m.

    A gun control lobbyist said this week that senators who voted against the bill received calls from constituents opposing the bill, 4 times as many calls opposing it as calls in favor of it. It seems senators did the will of the people.

    So are the 90% in favor of background polls pure fabrications?


    Was this filled with crap way beyond basic background checks.

    I think both.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    May 5, 2013 11:20 a.m.

    @Mike Richards
    Nothing Obama has proposed in gun control legislation and nothing they were voting on violates the 2nd Amendment. Even Scalia recogizes that there can be regulations on guns and he's the most conservative justice we have right now.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    May 5, 2013 11:15 a.m.

    The NRA spent:

    $2,980,000 (2012)
    $2,905,000 (2011)

    Outside Spending which consists of independent expenditures or electioneering communications:

    Contributions--( PAC or employees and their family made contributions to candidates, party committees like the RNC or the DSSC, other PACs, outside spending groups or 527s in the current cycle):


    The failure of the background check bill is just another example of tyranny by the minority that has gripped this nation since the Republican Party has seceded control to its fringe.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    May 5, 2013 10:40 a.m.

    "The NRA of America reported $227.8 million in revenues in 2010 — nearly half of which came from member dues ($100.5 million) and program fees ($6.6 million).

    This is not to say that the NRA does not benefit from gun sales. It does. Not only does it receive contributions from willing gun customers at the point of purchase, but gun manufacturers are major contributors to the NRA. Smith & Wesson in May became a member of the NRA’s “Golden Ring of Freedom,” which is for donors who contribute more than $1 million. In 2008, the Beretta Group — another “Golden Ring of Freedom” member — exceeded $2 million in donations.

    In one case, the gun manufacturer Sturm, Ruger & Company tied its donations directly to gun sales in a program called the “Million Gun Challenge.” According to an April 2012 press release, Ruger promised to donate $1 to the NRA-ILA for each gun it sold over the course of a year, from May 2011 to May 2012. The “Million Gun Challenge” exceeded its goal and raised $1.25 million."

  • SilverbackedGorrilla South Jordan, UT
    May 5, 2013 10:23 a.m.

    Supposedly the point of the legislation was to prevent another Newtown or Aurora type mass shooting, here's the problem nothing in the proposed legislation would have prevented either of those or any other mass shooting of recent memory from happening; the weapons were legally obtained-meaning an expanded background check would not have prevented the sale and making magazines smaller would have meant more reloading time-less than one minute total.

    Blame the NRA's lobby and money if you wish but be prepared for the two edge sword there are plenty of liberal special interest groups that throw money around too.

    If the true tide of America is rolling towards more gun restrictions, within the 2nd Amendment constraints of course, then so be it just be sure it isn't a false sense of security-motion is not always progress.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 5, 2013 10:14 a.m.

    @Bob Van Velkinburgh

    Much of the NRA's money comes from $10 donations from common people who are hoping for legislation that benefits their lives. They have a right to assemble, and the right to petition the government.

    You're just upset that things didn't go the way you wanted them to. Apparently, the legislation you supported was not as popular as you were told it was.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    May 5, 2013 8:36 a.m.

    The Wall Street Journal ran an article last week about how America has transformed from a market economy, to actually being a "market society", where the market sets a price on morals, on ethical behavior, on sex, on even kidneys.

    It's an interesting article, maybe even more interesting because the Wall Street Journal ran it.

    The market does not ask whether the transactions are moral, it only determines what the price will be.

    It's extraordinarily ironic how many conservatives are devout followers of Jesus, on Sundays, yet so enthusiastically engage and thrive in something that is having such a corrosive effect on society's morals, the rest of the week.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    May 5, 2013 8:05 a.m.

    When the President of the United States advocates breaking the 2nd Amendment, all of us should stand up to him. That's exactly what happened. OUR Representatives got the message that if they didn't stand up to Obama that they would be replaced. That's how America should work. The PEOPLE elect Representatives. Those Representatives write our laws according to the Constitution, not according to the whims of current "political correctness". The President executes the laws passed by Congress.

    If Obama wanted to legislate, he should have run for Congress. If he wanted to rule whether a law is Constitutional or not, he should have been appointed to the Supreme Court.

    At no time does the President have the authority to legislate or to create legislation. A dictator does that, but that's not our form of government.

    When the people get caught up in popular opinion without demanding that the Federal Government strictly follow the Constitution, we get the hand-wringing that so many participate in and the accusations that some group has "bought" our Congress.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    May 5, 2013 7:41 a.m.

    wrz, spoken like a true member of the Republican Party. That is exactly why the GOP must be voted down wherever it tries to further infest our nation.

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    May 5, 2013 12:07 a.m.

    "Gun vote shows money is being used to buy and sell politicians"

    What's wrong with that? That's the way our political system is supposed to work. Obama is playing it to the hilt.