Which GOP Candidates Own Guns?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Titan6

member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
4,745
Location
Gillikin Country
Watched the GOP debates last night. For the first time Guns came up A LOT.

Some of the more interesting moments:

- Hunter critical of the safety of one Utube video where a someone from off camera tossed a shotgun to someone on camera.

- All the candidates discussing the ''Parker'' (now just Heller) case.

My favorite part... it was asked who were gun owners. I came away with this:

DH- Fessed up to shotguns
JM- Not ''currently'' a gun owner
MR- Said his son owned shotguns and kept them at his house
FT- Yes, type unknown
RP- Yes, type unknown
RG- No
TT- Yes, type unknown
MH- Yes, type unknown

Is this correct? Sorry, I do not have Tivo. Any other information on their ownership status would be helpful.

Please try to limit your comments to the thread topic and not a bashing of the candidates or even a discussion of their views (as tempting as I know it is). I am just trying to figure out who the gun owners are.
 
Yes you are right

I saw this part of the debate, too. Someone asked the candidates which guns they actually owned. McCain said he carried a 45 in the war, but did not own a gun. Romney's son has guns, but not Mitt. Giuliani insisted that he made NYC safer by prohibiting guns, but that the 2nd amendment was great. Fred Thompson was disappointing, in my opinion. He said that he had some guns, but that he wouldn't tell what they were or where he kept them. In my opinion he was covering up his ignorance. He probably has a gun somewhere, but he hasn't shot it in such a long time that he has no idea what model it is. I don't see any great 2nd amendment supporters or "gun guys" running on the Republican ticket, and that is disappointing.
 
They also didn't ask all the candidates to answer the question. Romney and Thompson were asked directly by Anderson, as was McCain. Following McCain stating he didn't own any currently, Anderson did a sweeping "Anyone else here not own guns?" To which Rudy put his hand up. Then on to the next question.

The debate was terrible, but thats my 2 cents and something I will save for another forum. It was nice to see the amount of questions and time given to the 2nd amendment, though.
 
As disappointing as these republican responses were I would love to hear the responses to this question posed to the democratic side of the ballot. I fear for the future of gun ownership in our nation, especially if a Democrat is elected president and if the house and senate are also controlled by that party .
 
I am not so sure Thompson's answer was bad. I think telling what guns you own does go to security issues and am not so sure everyone would be forthcoming with every gun they owned on International TV.

I am disappointed that three of the front runner's McCain, Guilliani and Romney are all non-owners but I am not really surprised either. I hope someone asks the dems the same question. Truthful answers would be fascinating I am sure.
 
I didn't watch this debate, but from what I'm reading here, I can't fault Fred for not saying exactly what kind of guns he has. I mean, he's basically telling everybody that it's none of their business what guns he has, or where he keeps them. That fits in with my own attitude quite nicely.
 
I didn't see the debate, but I take it that Tom Gresham's question didn't make it. That is the question that I wanted to hear answered, "What gun control laws will you abolish in your administration?"
 
I am just trying to figure out who the gun owners are.

They should have asked Mike Huckabee about that, the only candidate on the stage who owns guns and shoots them. I bet he would have listed gauges and calibers too.

I also found rather interesting that both Hunter and McCain both started talking about their history of using guns in the military which tells me that they really do not get the Second Amendment.

Thompson, I think does not own any guns, which is OK, but he should have admitted to it, rather than giving a phony answer.
 
I am disappointed that three of the front runner's McCain, Guilliani and Romney are all non-owners but I am not really surprised either.

Interestingly enough, those are the 3 candidates who wouldn't have gotten my vote anyway. I don't have any trust for Rinos or east coast liberal state republicans.
 
Huckabee's ownership while govenor was quite well noted.

McCain's use of military arms does not constitute ''ownership'' to me. It makes me wonder if he has ever owned a gun? Does anyone know?
 
http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=18

The Second Amendment is primarily about tyranny and self-defense, not hunting. The Founding Fathers wanted us to be
able to defend ourselves from our own government, if need be, and from all threats to our lives and property.
Second Amendment rights belong to individuals, not cities or states. I oppose gun control based on geography.
I consistently opposed banning assault weapons and opposed the Brady Bill.
As Governor, I protected gun manufacturers from frivolous law suits.
I was the first Governor in the country to have a concealed handgun license.

No candidate has a stronger, more consistent record on Second Amendment rights than I do. Our Founding Fathers, having endured the tyranny of the British Empire, wanted to guarantee our God-given liberties. They devised our three branches of government and our system of checks and balances. But they were still concerned that the system could fail, and that we might someday face a new tyranny from our own government. They wanted us to be able to defend ourselves, and that's why they gave us the Second Amendment. They knew that a government facing an armed populace was less likely to take away our rights, while a disarmed population wouldn't have much hope. As Ronald Reagan reminded us, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction." Without our Second Amendment rights, all of our other rights aren't inalienable, they're just "on loan" from the government.

Other candidates say gun control doesn't affect hunting. Now I'm a very avid hunter, but the Second Amendment isn't really about hunting. It's about tyranny and self-defense. The Founding Fathers weren't worried about our being able to bag a duck or a deer, they were worried about our keeping our fundamental freedoms.

I once saw a bumper sticker that said, "Criminals prefer unarmed victims." Criminals will always find a way to get guns. By disarming our law-abiding citizens, we take away the strongest deterrent to violent criminals - the uncertainty that they don't know who is helpless and who is armed. Our law enforcement officials can't be everywhere, all the time. Lawfully-armed citizens back them up and prevent robberies, rapes, and the murder of innocents. Right after Katrina, with law enforcement non-existent, many victims were able to protect their lives, their homes, and their precious supplies of food and water only because they were armed.

Other candidates believe gun control should be determined geographically, but Second Amendment rights belong to individuals, not cities or states. Your Second Amendment rights don't change when you change your address.

Other candidates filed frivolous law suits against gun manufacturers. When I was Governor, I protected gun manufacturers from exactly those types of suits. I allowed former law enforcement officials to carry concealed handguns and removed restrictions on concealed handgun permit holders. I was the first Governor in the country to have a concealed handgun license, and of course I'm a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association.

Other candidates have supported banning assault weapons. When the federal ban on assault weapons expired in 2004, I said, "May it rest in peace." It won't be returning in the Huckabee Administration.

Zealously protecting your Second Amendment rights is another way that I will lift all law-abiding Americans up, by consistently championing your right to defend yourself.


Mike Huckabees' website!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top