Of the GOP candidates, it should be clear to everyone that Ron Paul is the most pro 2A, the most pro Constitution, and the most trustworthy on both. The man has been saying the same things for 3 decades.
As for Romney, let's not forget that he didn't sign a temporary AWB like Clinton did, he signed a PERMANENT AWB. I have zero confidence that Romney won't trade 2A rights for something he actually cares about. And while I don't see him appointing a more liberal justice overall to SCOTUS than Obama would, I certainly don't feel secure that a Romney appointee would be less liberal on 2A than an Obama appointee. The reality is that Romney doesn't care about 2A or understand why it is there. He believes it is an anachronistic provision. See this video (skip to about 1:30). Also, from seeing him talk about 'hunting', it sure seems that if citizens were only allowed to own .22lr rifles to hunt 'small varmints', that would suit him just fine.
A vote for Paul, assuming he is on a third party ticket, is NOT a vote for Obama. A vote for Obama gives Obama a greater mandate. A vote for a third party does not do that. On the other hand, a vote for Romney is a clear message to the GOP to keep giving us candidates like him, and we'll continue to alternate between establishment candidates every 4 or 8 years. Remember this is an establishment that wants to strip citizens of their rights, including their 2A rights, and has been doing so under the watch of both parties - Patriot Act, DHS, NDAA, continued extension of emergency rule, etc.
For those worried about some of Paul's polices, please keep in mind that he will be constrained by a Congress that is full of establishment lackeys from both parties. But you can count on him appointing only justices that are conservative Constitutionalists and shrinking the executive branch of the federal government.
No matter how you vote for President, be sure to check NRA, GOA, etc., for Senate and Congressional candidates' records on 2A.
As for Romney, let's not forget that he didn't sign a temporary AWB like Clinton did, he signed a PERMANENT AWB. I have zero confidence that Romney won't trade 2A rights for something he actually cares about. And while I don't see him appointing a more liberal justice overall to SCOTUS than Obama would, I certainly don't feel secure that a Romney appointee would be less liberal on 2A than an Obama appointee. The reality is that Romney doesn't care about 2A or understand why it is there. He believes it is an anachronistic provision. See this video (skip to about 1:30). Also, from seeing him talk about 'hunting', it sure seems that if citizens were only allowed to own .22lr rifles to hunt 'small varmints', that would suit him just fine.
A vote for Paul, assuming he is on a third party ticket, is NOT a vote for Obama. A vote for Obama gives Obama a greater mandate. A vote for a third party does not do that. On the other hand, a vote for Romney is a clear message to the GOP to keep giving us candidates like him, and we'll continue to alternate between establishment candidates every 4 or 8 years. Remember this is an establishment that wants to strip citizens of their rights, including their 2A rights, and has been doing so under the watch of both parties - Patriot Act, DHS, NDAA, continued extension of emergency rule, etc.
For those worried about some of Paul's polices, please keep in mind that he will be constrained by a Congress that is full of establishment lackeys from both parties. But you can count on him appointing only justices that are conservative Constitutionalists and shrinking the executive branch of the federal government.
No matter how you vote for President, be sure to check NRA, GOA, etc., for Senate and Congressional candidates' records on 2A.
Last edited: