Romney and AWB: I support the 2nd ammendment, but....

[.cheese.]

Wow. I'm dissapointed. Saying he supports something when he doesn't even know what it is specifically? That's not the kind of person I'd want to have in charge.

All that means is if you give a bill a "feel good" name, he'd support it.

This reminds me of the city that banned Dihydrogen Monoxodixe because a law was drafted citing numerous deaths from it. Sheesh.

I don't need somebody who supports bills without knowing the first thing about them.

If he "needed to see what weapons it lists", then why did he say he supports it?

 

[hoji]

Every body is trashing Romney, Giuliani, and McCain right now, but before its all over, most gun owners, and most people on this very forum will be enthusiastically voting for one of them for president.

We'll fall for the old "this election is to important too vote your conscience" or "a vote for a third party is a vote for Hillary" or "he's only playing politics saying he is supporting that AWB", just like we all did last time.

Pathetic but true. I will be voting for whomever represents me best, as I have in every election I have ever voted in.

 

[thumper723]

While I consider myself a "Practical Libertarian" in that I will vote for the lesser of two imeciles when one is really bad and the other is passivley bad, If it comes down to Guliani, McCain or Romney, I may vote Libertartian in the Presidential Election..

HEY GOP ACTIVISTS!! For what it is worth, I am a REGISTERED REPUBLICAN who has done such to try to push for Pro-Liberty Republican Candidates..

I won't vote for X over Y to send Y's party a message, but I sure as hell am not voting for an active gun grabber either...

 

[Green Lantern]

Every body is trashing Romney, Giuliani, and McCain right now, but before its all over, most gun owners, and most people on this very forum will be enthusiastically voting for one of them for president.

We'll fall for the old "this election is to important too vote your conscience" or "a vote for a third party is a vote for Hillary" or "he's only playing politics saying he is supporting that AWB", just like we all did last time.

I admit that I wasn't as into RKBA activism in 2004, but it seems like the choice between the "two evils" was a LOT clearer then!

I have been actively trying to turn fellow Republicans against McCain and Rudy for a while now, and will do it to Mitt too thanks to that idiotic remark he made about being a "2A supporter."

I still say that unless the Republican party pulls its head out of its collective rear, "the core" needs to find a good third party candiadate to get behind!

I have donated to the National Republican Senatorial Committee a time or two, and a few nights a go I sent them an e-mail blasting the state of the Party on issues like the 2nd Amendment and telling them that Hillary/Obama are as good as elected unless they remember what a conservative is!

It bounced back because the box was full, but I still have a copy. I think I need to make use of it.

 

[antsi]

---------quote----------
"he's only playing politics saying he is supporting that AWB",
------------------------

And look how bad that turned out, what with our new Republican-sponsored AWB in place. Boy, I sure learned my lesson on that one

There are lots of other reasons to be disappointed with the Bush presidency, but from a gun-related standpoint it has not been bad.

If we could get another eight years of Bush-like performance on gun laws, I think we would be a LOT better off than we are actually going to be under President Hilary or President OBama.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

You are thanking Bush for the lack of gun laws in the last eight years? You have to be kidding. You need to thank the Congress for not sending him a bill. I have no doubt that he would have signed an AWB if it made it to his desk. There is nothing to thank him for, its the Congress.

Maybe you should thank me for not signing an AWB. I have had just as much chance to do it as Bush.

 

[Prince Yamato]

He's bluffing. He won't sign a ban. He needs to tow Republican party line. Also, Machineguns are LEGAL in Mass. He says his views have been changed in some areas, I'll hedge a bet that if he won the primary, his views would suddenly change in the 2A area to go against a new AWB. Come on folks, he was essentially skirting the question. He basically said the same thing GWB said in 2004.

I find irony that people are willing to forgive Jim Zumbo, a man who publicly bashed assault weapons and called them "terrorist rifles" yet when Romney skirts the question and double-talks his way out of it pre-primary, you all say, "oh he can't possibly be pro-2A". I swear some of you don't know the political game. He was pro-50BMG and said he'd "have to look" at the new AWB... he's not going to sign one. READ BETWEEN THE LINES folks.

If we could get another eight years of Bush-like performance on gun laws, I think we would be a LOT better off than we are actually going to be under President Hilary or President OBama.

+1... now run, because the libertarians are going to come for us in about 5 minutes...

 

[nico]

He says his views have been changed in some areas, I'll hedge a bet that if he won the primary, his views would suddenly change in the 2A area to go against a new AWB.

why would he become more pro-gun in the general election? I thought the political strategy was to appeal to your base (ie: gun owners) in the primary and get more moderate in the general election? What advantage would he get by doing it backwards?

 

[Green Lantern]

I find irony that people are willing to forgive Jim Zumbo, a man who publicly bashed assault weapons and called them "terrorist rifles" yet when Romney skirts the question and double-talks his way out of it pre-primary, you all say, "oh he can't possibly be pro-2A". I swear some of you don't know the political game. He was pro-50BMG and said he'd "have to look" at the new AWB... he's not going to sign one. READ BETWEEN THE LINES folks.

We got Zumbo fired virtually overnight, his whole professional world turned upside-down. That's gotta open a man's eyes and make him think. We can't do the same thing to Romney.

You are thanking Bush for the lack of gun laws in the last eight years? You have to be kidding. You need to thank the Congress for not sending him a bill. I have no doubt that he would have signed an AWB if it made it to his desk. There is nothing to thank him for, its the Congress.

Maybe you should thank me for not signing an AWB. I have had just as much chance to do it as Bush.

Not....:banghead: This....:banghead: Again!!!! :banghead:

Do they come more pro-2A than Bush? You bet! Do they come WORSE than Bush? You bet! Prime examples? GORE and KERRY, the "alternatives."

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Support The 2A?

How about abiding the darn thing! It wasn't added to the Constitution just to be supported. It was added to be obeyed!

Woody

"It is contended, that this article of the code, is in violation of the constitution of the United States, and of this state. The clause in the constitution of the United States, that it is said to be in violation of, is the 2d article of the amendments: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." O. & W. Dig. 7. The clause in the constitution of this state, which it is said to violate, is the 13th section of the bill of rights: "Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms, in the lawful defense of himself or the state." O. & W. Dig. 14.

The object of the clause first cited, has reference to the perpetuation of free government, and is based on the idea, that the people cannot be effectually oppressed and enslaved, who are not first disarmed. The clause cited in our bill of rights, has the same broad object in relation to the government, and in addition thereto, secures a personal right to the citizen. The right of a citizen to bear arms, in the lawful defense of himself or the state, is absolute. He does not derive it from the state government, but directly from the sovereign convention of the people that framed the state government. It is one of the "high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and "is excepted out of the general powers of government." A law cannot be passed (p.402)to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the law-making power." - Texas Supreme Court Decision, Cockrum vs State of Texas, ---- 1859

Seems some of the states did consider the 2A binding upon the states. Some still do.

 

[xd9fan]

Don't suport him then....and quit beating your head against the wall . I don't think I could ever vote for a mitt.

The head banging stops when you realize the GOP IS NOT PRO-GUN. They are not loyal to your love of guns.......why are you loyal to them.......THIS make me :banghead:

 

[ArfinGreebly]

For what it's worth:

Here's my email to Romney's people (if anyone has a direct email address for him, I'll send it again).

Please advise Mr. Romney that there is a broad constituency of gun owners and people who would very much like to own them who are watching his political statements with some interest.

I would point out that his statement that he "supports" the Second Amendment, followed by a standard political hedge falls rather short of the mark.

It should be clear: the Constitution is the most senior law of the land. The Amendments to this Constitution -- especially the first ten -- are not only part and parcel, they were added because without them the Constitution would not have been ratified. The Amendments (the Bill of Rights) are foundation.

They are law.

They are the highest law.

It is silly, almost dishonest, to say "I support law" -- law is something you obey, not something you support.

The way you would honestly "support" the Second Amendment is to fully enforce it, repealing any law which abridges it.

In the language of the lay person: guns are freedom and liberty; gun control is murder.

Said another way: gun ownership -- not just a good idea -- it's the law.

Mr. Romney, I believe I can speak with some confidence when I say that there are quite literally millions of voters just waiting to hear the words, "the Second Amendment is our sacred guarantee of freedom; gun control is the favorite tool of tyrants."

You will garner a huge surge in popularity.

The socialist left will vilify you, and your "conservative" opponents will squirm.

It takes brass to get out in front of civil rights this way.

It will win you major points.

I look forward to hearing a presidential candidate that has the courage to put our freedoms and civil liberties ahead of politics.

Sincerely,

~~ ArfinGreebly
~~ Carson City, Nevada

I figure, if I can write a gripe here, I can write a gripe there.

Might as well gripe where it matters.

 

[bogie]

I've got an idea...

Let's not vote for the candidate from the party which pretty much supports our cause, and instead make sure that the candidate from the party which just flat out hates us gets elected.

Yeah, that's makes perfect sense.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

bogie

It seems we already did that.

It'll fester for a couple of years before we can get to it with any antibiotics.

Sorry.

 

[ConfuseUs]

Mr. Romney, the second you said "I supports the 2nd Amendment but I also support another assault weapons ban..." quite a few votes slipped from your...












Wait for it....








Mitt!

It's like you don't really wanna be president.

 

[ssr]

If we support and vote for candidates who say they are for banning guns, what good is our gun vote and how respected is it? We would lose all credibility and noone would care, since they get our vote whether they are for gun rights or gun control. They would stop trying for our vote and instead go after the soccor moms votes, otr whoever the fence sitters are.

If both parties start running on platforms of gun bans, our vote becomes irrelevant very quickly. That is where we are headed. They have to know that they need to be for gun rights or they lose!

 

[Green Lantern]

Numbersusa has a fax for Romney - I don't know if NUSA "screens" faxes we submit, but I used the P.S. space to point out that he's gonna lose a LOT of conservative support if he does not learn the facts of the "Assault" weapons ban.

 

[SWMAN]

Guiliani has no proof that his gun control worked to lower NYC crime. He may have had gun control laws passed during his watch, (I'd like to see which ones) and crime may have gone down, but that doesn't necessarily mean those laws were responsible for the decline. Secondly, his gun control had no effect on hunting. He's right. When's the last time anyone went hunting (for four footed animals that is) in NYC???? Dumb, dumb, :banghead:

 

[GEM]

Silly social conservatives, Guns are for Wabbits!

The Fudd collection of GOP Candidates, Inc.

Please send donations to us.

This ad is brought to you by the O/U Gun Owners of America. Remember to use the O/U carefully - unless you shoot down an endangered species or your friend. In that case, avoid the press and blame the bird or geezer for getting in front of you.

 

[antsi]

----------quote-----------
You are thanking Bush for the lack of gun laws in the last eight years? You have to be kidding. You need to thank the Congress for not sending him a bill. I have no doubt that he would have signed an AWB if it made it to his desk. There is nothing to thank him for, its the Congress.

Maybe you should thank me for not signing an AWB. I have had just as much chance to do it as Bush.
----------------------------

Fine; blame whom you want or credit whom you want. Most people lump "Bush and the Republicans" together, and the election of a Democrat Congress was widely seen as a repudiation of Bush. If you want to keep them separate and credit the Republican Congress while repudiating Bush, go ahead.

What I am saying is, given the political landscape now and the looming likelihood of a Democrat White House plus a Democrat Congress, it is unlilely we will be able to look back eight years from now and have no new or re-newed gun control laws.

And, while we're at it, if you really believe that you have as much influence on Congress' legislative agenda as does the sitting President of the United States, then I will thank you for helping to keep AWB renewal buried in committee for the last eight years. Thank you very much; please keep up the good work.

 

[Erebus]

Well Mitt just lost my vote, unless he changes that tune.

I really hope Fred Thompson runs. Last I knew he had formed an exploratory committee.