Discussion in 'Activism' started by JKimball, Dec 25, 2007.
Just to keep things in perspective:
Let me put things in perspective for you. Now that you dug up an old quote that was taken out of context do you believe you are making a point? If you are trying to point out I don't like AWs well you are right, I personaly don't like the look of assault type rifles nor would I own one, but the key point you missed is that does not mean I don't think others should not be able to own them. People like you enjoy twisting peoples words by taking their comments out of context. Which in the end proves nothing. You see not liking AWs does not mean a person favors more gun control. Anyway back to the topic, the signing of the new AWB was better for Mass gun owners since it cleaned up some gun control. That is alot better than what the antis wanted when they first introduced the new bill which was a new AWB that would ban all semi-auto rifles, and large capacity magazines. They lost we won.
I wasn't trying to twist your words or take them out of context. I provided a link to the thread it came from and included your entire post. I don't have any problem with what you said in that post or your posts on this thread. My only point is that when you stand up as a credible witness as a resident of Massachusetts to weigh in on the Assault Weapons Ban there, it is reasonable to disclose that you personally have no interest in owning them anyway. In fact I'm glad you posted because it shows that there are lots of gun owners and many of them feel like an assault weapons ban is acceptable as long as some of our other gun rights are preserved. I would guess that Romney's position now is actually pretty much in line with a majority of gun owners. There was a time when I felt that way too. But obviously, many of us here believe his position is entirely inconsistent with the second amendment.
When you say you believe the AWB that Romney signed was a good step for your state, I can accept that many gun owners there feel that way. But an AWB is still an AWB. And there are some gun owners that maintain AWBs are unacceptable.
As posted above we had a AWB in this state since 1994 similar to the Federal AWB. There was no sunset clause. In 2003 a group of anti politicans got together to write a new bill that would further the restrictions of current state AWB. After they brought it to committe to be reviewed it was sidelined by some progun Democrat legislators. After much haggling they finally rewrote it to be a near copy of the current ban but with some wording changes that cleared up some grey areas in the old law. Pluse we got some additional benfits. What you fail to realize is that this is Massachusetts, not Utah. It could have been far worse, if the bill had passed as origninaly worded it would have banned all semi-auto guns in the state. We take what we can get in a state which is controled by politicans who really don't care about the RKBA. We made a small step forward in a anti-gun state, where most gun owners could care less about AWs.
I think I understand what you're saying and I really do appreciate your perspective on this topic. Now I'll ask you to demonstrate that you won't just sit back and watch Romney sign another AWB into law, even if you aren't interested in owning them yourself. Send him a letter on the subject and then post it here.
Romneys Email response, likely a staffer.
Thank you for contacting me to offer your comments and suggestions for my campaign as I run for President of the United States of America.
I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to write me with your thoughts for my campaign. I will certainly keep these sentiments in mind as we move forward through the election cycle.
Again, thank you for your suggestions. I genuinely value your input.
jkimbal:I was from mass and cbsbyte has got it right. given the culture of mass you peck away at the bad ones till you get it emasculated.romney listened to GOAL and the the progun dems.believe me when I say the rep.gov has a hard row to hoe .I to like the older guns but I do have a AR15 I built.the rest of them dont turn me on.one thing that is amazing in Mass is the amount of gun clubs.probable far more than in Ut:banghead:
Thanks for your in state perspective. Along with what cbsbyte said, it gives a little more validity to my hope that Romney is willing to listen to gun owners on this issue. That is the whole purpose of this thread, to let him hear our voices. Are you willing to ask him to veto future AWBs that congress may send him?
I'm surprised nobody's bothered to email him the fact and figures that state that more then 70% of gun-related violent crimes are done with small-frame automatic pistols in calibers smaller then .45.
Afterall, it's rather hard to stuff a SKS or AR-15 with Bayonet lug and Pictnanny rail into your pocket when the fuzz cruises by on patrol. Hell, it's hard to do that with most normal sized revolvers and automatic; ever tried to put a 1911 in your pocket? 'Aint easy.
Massachusetts gun owners please weigh in
Teddy and cbsbyte have both indicated that as gun owning residents of Massachusetts they were actually pleased with the legislation that Romney passed. Are there any other MA residents that will weigh in on the issue? Was anybody outraged with his assault weapons ban?
Good one, Remmi.
Did you send that to him?
I did not say I was pleased nor did cbstybe.we stated what the bill did.and stated that given the political climate it was lucky to get that.I wanred to make it clear the bill was passed before romney was in office and it was changed to give gun owners help.and I belive romney stated a fact of life that he wasnot going to change the gun laws.but he did get concesions to favor gun owners.GOA seem to be the dominant leader in falsifing what was done.I just came from a gun show with their version of the law.no concesions no changes.he worked with GOAL. and no I am not resident of Mass I left in 2000.but am member of gun club and life member of GOAL and keep up with news.mass is like calif can't change it.
Let's educate him by voting for Ron Paul!
Why even deal with Romney, when Ron Paul is running?
Here's my policy on picking a candidate. I don't believe a single word they say AFTER they announce their intentions to run. I look at their record PRIOR. This is why I don't understand how people are so easily swayed by sweeping statements candidates make during their campaigns.
Mitt is a good guy. Some guys I am in the guard with worked directly for him during the '02 olympics, and they say he's great. And I really will appreciate that he gets all the petty anti-mormon issues out of the way so that John Huntsman Jr. can run in '12.
I will be rooting for Huckabee in '08.
Did you hear Dr. Paul's lame and uninformed response to Romney regarding the origins of islamic terrorism?
I am kind of a Ron Paul fan for all his other views but the look on his face, and tone in his voice while trying to answer that made me real nervous about him. It is very clear he just does not understand the nature of the threat posed by Islamic radicalism.
He truly seems to beleive in live and let live, something the islamic radicals just don't agree with at all.
Ok, you weren't pleased with the AWB, but you felt lucky that he signed it. Sorry if you thought I was trying to put words in your mouth. Will you send Romney a comment and tell him why you weren't pleased?
GVman & Tecumseh, "Yay, high fives, we did nothing for RKBA in this thread! Wohoo!" Please read the thread. By all means, educate him by voting for Ron Paul. I'm not asking you to vote for Romney. If you want to put all your eggs in the Ron Paul basket and bet your second amendment rights that he will win the election, then don't bother with anybody else. But if you want to post in this thread, then go tell Romney why Ron Paul is better on this issue and then copy your comment here. Even if we don't vote for Romney, he still might get elected. May as well hit him on this now. If he doesn't hear our voices he will be justified in thinking he is right.
I can appreciate that sentiment when student body presidential candidates are promising soda pop in the drinking fountains. Or perhaps even when U.S. presidential candidates are saying they'll get rid of the income tax and the IRS. But to be fair, Romney has a record of keeping his campaign promises. So we're better off getting him to change his awb position while he is campaigning than when he has it sitting on his desk awaiting his signature. And he has openly admitted that he is willing to listen to educated arguments against his position and make changes when he sees he is in the wrong.
By all means, vote for Huckabee. He is right on when it comes to the second amendment. But why not let Romney hear your voice? Honestly, I am surprised how reluctant so many "activists" in this thread are to let there voices be heard. I'm beginning to see why politicians just don't get it.
This thread is pretty touchy and will be pretty easy to get locked if we get off topic. Please just let us know what kind of comment you left Romney.
Here is what i sent him. Even so, the web site is clearly mostly an attempt to collect names and addresses for future campaign contribution junk mail.
It has been a couple weeks since I started this thread, and I haven't had any response to my comment as some of you have, so I left them another question:
I have stated my opinion,I see no other canidate as presidential potential.
none.the polls may be slanted to the area they are in.I wait to the primary.
JKimball has a good point.
I've been mulling this over. If Romney gets the Republican nomination, that'll be who I vote for. Cringe, pull the lever, and cast my vote against Hillary. Being a career politician and a Republican (at least in name) he has to play ball with the conservatives. I'm willing to put up with the laws as they are now if that's the best I can get. I too want some commitment from Romney that he won't go after AWs. I'm not saying I want the guy to be president, but if he ends up being president, I want to know that he'll commit to at least preserving our 2A rights.
BTW folks, the Ron Paul crap is getting old. It's not a political thread, it's an activism thread. JKimball's point is to at least get all the Republicans speaking the same language concerning 2A not to get you to switch your more-precious-than-gold Ron Paul magic ticket to your favorite Republican-to-bash de jour. I understand why people like Paul, but I'm sick to death of his name brought up in every damn discussion. Yeah, you like Ron Paul, great. What if he doesn't get the nomination? He may be the best hope ideologically, but politically I don't think that's the case. Back up plans folks, that's what needs to be looked at.
Why are you supporting Ron Paul?
I really cannot understand why so many of you support Ron Paul. Sure he is a fiscal conservative, which I agree with, but so are many of the Republican candidates. Ron Paul is a major whiner to the nth degree!! - - and when he talks, all he does is put America down - - like he hates this Country. If this is your idea of a potentially good leader, then I guess we will disagree.
He wants to walk out on a war we are currently involved in; and even though I may not agree with the Iraq war, I sure don't want to lose the war. To vote for him is to say I want to lose a war - which is a really pathetic philosophy to support. I could go on, but I'll save more for later posts if anybody really feels the need to respond. Mainly, I would like people to specifically answer the question - do you want to lose the Iraq war like Ron Paul? If so, then why?
Welcome to The High Road! Just so you know, one of the rules for this forum is that we don't discuss/argue politics. Not my rule, but I can see the sense in it. That inevitably divides people and as gun owners we should be united in our RKBA activism efforts. I recognize that that rule has been broken numerous times in this thread, but I'm trying to keep the politics out as much as possible so the moderators won't shut it down. We're not here to bash Romney or sing praises of any candidates. The purpose of this thread is to let Romney hear the voices of law abiding gun owners telling him he is wrong on assault weapons bans. If you agree that he is, please leave a comment on his website and post a copy of it here.
Reminder to everybody:
This being the Activism Forum of THR, it is subject to even more strict rules than the site in general. This thread isn't really for discussion. There is a sub-forum for that purpose. This thread is for action. If you want to participate in the thread, please take the action suggested. If you think it is a stupid idea, don't talk about it here. Go start a thread with your better idea so we can all work on it together.
It isn't ignorance, it's malfeasance.
I'm jumping into this thread late, but my experiences of dealing with politicians, both directly and indirectly causes me to be very sceptical of the concept of "educating" politicians.
Way too many of us believe that if we could only somehow "show them" the real meaning of 2A and the value of RKBA, they would somehow magically have a change of heart and come down on the side of the angels.
It simply doesn't work that way.
The sooner we all accept that any politician who arrives in an elected or appointed position with animosity towards RBKA doen't arrive there out of ignorance. He or she arrives there out of malfeasance. They have had the opportunity to hear everything we'd like to tell them, and they have rejected it, usually for opportunistic reasons.
They aren't causes, they are symptoms. They have pandered to our fellow citizens who would gladly throw US under the bus.
It isn't ignorance, it's malfeasance, and malfeasance isn't remedied by education.
Malfeasance recognizes only force, which in this context is electoral.
The people who need to be educated aren't the politicians, it is the craven electorate.
The only way for "education" to work in this context is to credibly demonstrate to Governor Romney that his support for the AWB will be the thing that costs him the nomination unless he has a genuine "Road to Damascus" moment. Many of us have delivered our individual messages; I don't know what more we can do.
Separate names with a comma.