New Hampshire Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte has been one of the prime targets of the Gun Control Industrial Complex ever since she cast a vote against the Manchin-Toomey background check amendment. Our friends at MAIG have tapped into Mayor Mike’s bottomless wallet to run ads in The Granite State accusing her of having “gone Washington.” Now, she’s pushing pack. Reader tank03 sent us a link to an op-ed she penned for the Manchester Union-Leader, explaining her position to Live Free or Die-ers back home . . .
Out-of-state special interests are running false ads attacking me and even lying about my efforts to prevent gun-related violence. I want to set the record straight: I support effective background checks and in fact voted recently to improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
As a former prosecutor who served for five years as New Hampshire’s attorney general, I have a demonstrated record of punishing criminals and strengthening public safety. Having worked as a murder prosecutor, I’ve witnessed horrific crime scenes. I’ve spent time with victims – and I’ve worked day and night to put violent offenders behind bars.
From my experience working with police chiefs, detectives and prosecutors, I know how important it is to have laws that work – and I know how important it is to enforce the laws we have on the books.
Despite what the false attack ads say, I helped introduce and voted for the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act, which improves the existing background check system, addresses mental health gaps in the criminal justice system, boosts resources to improve school safety, and criminalizes gun trafficking and straw purchases. The legislation also puts teeth into the law by creating a high level federal task force to increase the prosecution of gun-related violence.
Also, given the clear connection between mental illness and mass violence tragedies at Newtown, Aurora and Virginia Tech, I cosponsored and voted for the Mental Health Awareness and Improvement Act. This bipartisan measure includes provisions of legislation I helped introduce that seeks to improve mental health first aid training and increase the effectiveness of mental health care across the nation. This amendment passed the Senate overwhelmingly by a vote of 95 to 2.
It’s clear that criminals who attempt to illegally purchase firearms aren’t being prosecuted as they should be – and have not been for years. For example, in 2010, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms screened 76,142 NICS denials. Of those, charges were brought in only 44 cases – and resulted in just 13 successful prosecutions. This sends the message to criminals that there won’t be any consequences when they try to get their hands on guns.
Some of my colleagues want to expand the broken background check system we have now. In my view, we shouldn’t be expanding a flawed system. The focus should be on fixing the existing system, which criminals are flouting. We need to make sure we are enforcing current law and prosecuting those who attempt to illegally obtain firearms. And we must ensure that NICS includes records currently not being entered in the system, including mental health adjudications where an individual is found to be a danger to themselves and others.
There are no easy answers. Even if the proposed expansion of background checks had been in place, it wouldn’t have prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy, where the perpetrator obtained the firearms he used by killing his own mother, who owned them lawfully.
Like citizens across New Hampshire, I want to find solutions that will stop criminals and those who are mentally ill from obtaining firearms. I want to make sure we punish those who try to access guns illegally. And I want to improve the nation’s mental health system so that those who are on the front lines can identify the warning signs of mental illness and help those in need get proper help.
In the Senate, I know that there are members of both parties who want to find common ground on this important issue. And my commitment to the people of New Hampshire is that I will continue to try to work across the aisle to prevent violence, enforce and improve our broken background check system, strengthen mental health services, and increase school safety, all while protecting the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans.
Misleading television and radio ads are counterproductive and only help to poison this important discussion.
Now, to seal the deal, all she has to do is add the following at the bottom of all of her political literature: “Mike Bloomberg did not approve this message.”
Game, set, and match.
I hate the common ground meme. It is either constitutional, or it is not. Compromising rights because the other side is waving the bloody shirt is ridiculous. Rights need to be maintained first. People will abuse those rights and we should do what we can to stop it, but ALL systems fail to some extent. The bloody shirt brigade is screaming for the 100% prevent all death solutions and it is not realistic. Plus they are ignoring all of the studies on how firearms benefit society.
Let her have it. She stands with us, and “common ground” and “common sense” is what the squishy middle wants to make them feel good. Better Ayotte define “common ground” than Feinstein.
I agree that she is doing the right thing and we sure as hell don’t want Frankenstein defining it. I just cringe when I see that common ground phrase thrown around.
Six, when my eyes see the words “common grounds,” my brain sees the word “unicorns.”
Ayotte is a republican, not a dem.
Yes. There’s a wee difference.
Statist-A or Statist-B.
I agree with you. The difference is indeed “wee.” Both parties break from the constitution on a fundamental level.
Who cares? The important question is: MILF or NO MILF?
🙂
I’d be willing to bang Feinstein if it would shut her up finally.
B, as desperate as she is, not that I intend you harm, but here is to hoping you take one for the team buddy, King Leonidas would have nothing on your sacrifice!
And we wonder why so few females read this site.
“It’s clear that criminals who attempt to illegally purchase firearms aren’t being prosecuted as they should be – and have not been for years. For example, in 2010, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms screened 76,142 NICS denials. Of those, charges were brought in only 44 cases – and resulted in just 13 successful prosecutions. This sends the message to criminals that there won’t be any consequences when they try to get their hands on guns.”
This is the part of her letter that needs to be brought to the attention of those who feel that a universal background check is desperately needed. The fact that background checks have been in place since the enactment of the Brady bill for most purchases, yet the government has not followed through.
If the government did not follow through on it’s obligations with the BGCs then, why would it be different now, in an era of fiscal cutbacks? Amazing we hear the antis rave on and on with lies and half truths, yet not many bring this glaring omission to light. This little FACT is one that should be used by all on the Pro 2A side, whenever an anti demands BGCs.
this caught my eye also… but I feel her statement is jumping to conclusions… I think it proves criminals are getting their guns elsewhere, not that the NICS system isn’t working
Kelly Ayotte is a Republican… I’m from NH and live literally five minutes from her.
As a native of the “Live Free or Die” state, I’ve been following Senator Ayotte for years. I think that she was an effective state prosecutor. She wasn’t the kind that was always trying to get in front of the cameras for self promotion. I’ve met her a few times (one of the benefits of living in a small state) and she seems to be the real deal. Her husband is former military and together, she and her husband are small business owners. I think that she “gets it” on guns. Someone once said “If you’re getting a lot of flak, you must be right on target.” Senator Ayotte is right in the cross hairs.
I live in New Hampshire and I’ve seen the adds there down right nasty
She is a Republican.
I am a Democrat.
I wrote to her promising a contribution and volunteered to make calls to fellow gun owning Democrats to encourage them to put the Constitution before party loyalty.
+1
+ 10
You just made my night! Good on you!
I never understood party affiliation. I’m an American and I vote for the best candidate. That said, politicians in general turn my stomach and I generally have to hold my nose as I pull the lever.
She’s also a shooter. I met her at a gun show in Concord.
I really like this lady. She just strikes me as a very intelligent, rational, grounded, leader-type personality, who has darn bright future. I think her experience separates her from the pack on the gun issue …just like the vast majority of LEO’s, who also look at this issue with a sober eye of reality …not how the drama-queen liberal media machine and their sheep followers and elitist socialistic masters would have us view it of course — but from a calm, confident position of wisdom that she has gained from her experience.
Heck I’d trade her for any of our Senators here in PA.
I’d trade her for BOTH our senators here in CA in a heartbeat.
Any chance we can get her and Cruz (together) on the ticket for 2016?
Who heads the ticket?
Cruz was born in Canada sir, he cannot run for president unfortunately.
But Mr. Rand Paul, Kentucky Senator, was born in the greatest city in this nation, San Antonio, Texas (I think Nick might agree with me here), so by all means petition him for the ticket!
Ted Cruz can run for president if he wants…. He was a U.S. Citizen at birth. His mother was born in Delaware and she spent at least two years of her life in the U.S. after the age of 16.
Correct.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/yes-ted-cruz-can-be-born-in-canada-and-still-become-president-of-the-us/275469/
He was born in Canada, true, but to a U.S. citizen.
If a U.S. citizen gives birth abroad, the kid is still a naturally born U.S. citizen, and qualifies.
For that matter, the kid of two illegal residents, if born here, qualifies.
The Constitution is funny that way.
[q]For that matter, the kid of two illegal residents, if born here, qualifies.[/q]
um no, that is a made up part of the 14th amendment, there is no such thing as “an anchor baby” and it just means there is now an illegal baby along with two illegal parents
I am also from NH, Ayotte is a “Straight Shooter” so to speak.
As a native of the land where “Yankee” is a complement (currently transplanted to Arizona), I wish we had more representatives of Representative Ayotte’s caliber.
Looking over to the Union-Leader website, it alarms me to see the number of ignorant fools posting there, people who have bought the gun grabbers’ accusations against Representative Ayotte. “No system is perfect, so you should have voted for what they put on the table!” Completely ignoring the evidence, those people wholeheartedly believe that even the most ill-considered of laws must prevent further mass killings.
What the…?!?
Something nice said about a democrat ’round here? I’m floored.
Sorry; couldn’t resist. :]
Well, I’m sure Senator Ayotte would be surprised as well, because as others have mentioned, she’s a Republican: http://www.ayotte.senate.gov/?p=about_senator
Right there in the second paragraph.
Get off the floor Russ, she is a republican not a dombocrat!
Yeah, Aye wos jus’ ‘avin’ me a spo’ o’ fun, pokin’ at them mistakes in th’ article.
That (sorta) said, I LIKE her.
I like this woman. A lot. She is showing real guts in the face of some stern opposition – which includes the current POTUS – in known hostile territory. she is having success “behind enemy lines.” Guess command of facts and ability to coherently articulate them helps. Those who lean to the right of the the aisle would need more like her. Matters not be they woman or man…Though in this age of playing to the “important demographics” the media says is critical to winning – i.e., anything but white males – sure doesn’t hurt she’s a she. I like her.
I say get her out there now, and let her tell Hillary 2016: “Bring it, b*tch.”
So when are they going to add adjudicated psychos to the NICS no-buy list?
Oh they’re not going to do that? wow, obvious victory for the 2nd amendment I guess.
Adjudicated psychos already ARE on the no-buy list.
Few states report the adjudications, and that’s the problem.
It would take thousands of new employees & millions or billions of dollars to have someone stop by the courthouse once a week or so to see if anyone’s been adjudged insane or committed to an institution.
Those people will all need to be certified law enforcement officers and will all need offices, cars, secretaries, and supervisors all the way to Washington, D.C., and regular reports of their activities will need to be made all the way up the line.
Of course, the information is available online, so why not have somebody examine the easily available online court records instead of looking at porn or playing another game of Freecell or Words With Friends.
??? It would take thousands of people and they have to be sworn officers to do that job?…But it could be accessed online easily?……….which one is it? Its hard to do, or easy to do?
The argument regarding cost is a distraction technique. Whatever means it takes now for criminals to be put into the NICS database, that would be the same system for adjudicated kooks, the court system clerks. No new jobs, no thousands of officers and offices, no new training, just additional names to enter into the system by the same bureaucrats that do it now. Another box to check off on a court record. another mouse click. Or whatever computer program that does it. I cant imagine that list is going to be a flood of names. All systems are built to handle expanses and contractions of workload without needing to start from scratch every time. That “should” also apply to the NICS system.
If suddenly the NICS list grew due to criminal convictions, I doubt that the system would experience any growing pains. Those kinds of warnings are the cries of the public service employees unions that cry foul when we the people ask them to at least try to be efficient at doing their jobs.
This is the one issue that should get complete support. Then at least the anti gunners can finally say they “did” something. Many times it’s wise to let your adversary think that they actually won, so they just go away.
I wrote Honorable Ayotte last week commending her on her vote for our 2A rights after reading the article about a resident of NH who’s mother was killed in Newtown, and acknowledging to her the bills voted on would have zero effect on the heinous tragedies in Colorado and Connecticut. Fortunately she “gets it” when it comes to over legislation that basically repeats laws on the books that are not being upheld and that further work needs to be done for mental health and school security issues. She has more “stuff” than Virginia’s 2 sheep in Washington.
I wrote her thanking her for her vote and recently thanked her for her stance against Internet sales tax. I have watched her for years and saw her in action in court while serving on jury duty. This is a stand up lady I have given her my support and let her know it by writing her. Go to her website and write letting her know you support you don’t have to be a native of NH to thank her. I think when our reps do the right thing it is important to let them know we care.
Rob Drummond
Hillsboro, NH
Great idea, thanks, Rob. I’m getting set to do that right now! Don’t wanna piss off any of her constituents, but there’s a place for her here in IL, or as I refer to it, The People’s Republic of Illinois. We’re stuck with the products of the “Machine” up north in and around Cook County.
The bed wetters aren’t interested in well thought out intelligent solutions. It doesn’t stroke their ego nor flame their emotions.
With NICS checks taking over two weeks now, I say we change the name to NECS.
National Eventual Check System
I’m going on almost three weeks to pick up two lowers just sitting at my LGS.
Flawed system indeed.
-ted
Here’s the photo of Senstor Ayotte you wanted to use
http://www.unionleader.com/storyimage/UL/20120623/NEWS02/706249929/EP/1/1/EP-706249929.jpg?q=100
The knee-slapper in all this is that the Bloomberg attack ads say voting against gun control = “going Washington.”
If only.
We need to call and support her to keep her pro gun asap!