This exchange does not install confidence in Mitt.

[Newg]

 

[Newg]

Before anyone goes fixing my grammar, it should have said "INSTILL"

 

[88GT]

Mitt doesn't own the Mass. AWB. And his legislation that amended it MADE IT BETTER.

 

[Newg]

Mitt doesn't own the Mass. AWB. And his legislation that amended it MADE IT BETTER.

Excellent! I appreciate that info. Hopefully I can count on President Mitt to "fix" more sh!tty legislation before he signs it.

 

[jeremy]

Mitt doesn't own the Mass. AWB. And his legislation that amended it MADE IT BETTER.

This!

Many in Mass. feel that what he did with their AWB was a HUGE benefit for Gunowners in their State. You should attempt to track down their Laws prior to what he is being labeled with as being a Gun Banner/Grabber...

 

[sepe]

Mitt doesn't own the Mass. AWB. And his legislation that amended it MADE IT BETTER.

Do you think he would be looking to work for that bipartisan/anti-gun/pro-gun legislature? What kind of confuses me is that he says we need more of this. Candy's last question and Romney's answer don't make much sense for someone that is against bans. It sounds as if both sides work together, he'd be for it (when asked about a ban).

 

[cobber]

Just curious. Aside from bromides from the true believers, what was Gary Johnson's record in New Mexico?

Does anyone have clean hands in the debate, except for those who aren't actually playing the game (ie, politics)?

 

[88GT]

Excellent! I appreciate that info. Hopefully I can count on President Mitt to "fix" more sh!tty legislation before he signs it.

I wouldn't hold my breath on improvements to our federal firearms laws. In the first place, I doubt Congress will even bring up the subject , let alone in language that pleases us (with the possible exception of a national reciprocity bill). But more than that, I just don't think it's on Romney's radar. He's apathetic towards the whole thing. He could have absolute power and I doubt he'd lift a finger to change a thing.

It's bittersweet. Things won't get worse, but they won't get better either.

 

[sepe]

Just curious. Aside from bromides from the true believers, what was Gary Johnson's record in New Mexico?

Does anyone have clean hands in the debate, except for those who aren't actually playing the game (ie, politics)?

Gary Johnson has horns and a split tongue!!!!

 

[cobber]

I wouldn't hold my breath on improvements to our federal firearms laws. In the first place, I doubt Congress will even bring up the subject , let alone in language that pleases us (with the possible exception of a national reciprocity bill). But more than that, I just don't think it's on Romney's radar. He's apathetic towards the whole thing. He could have absolute power and I doubt he'd lift a finger to change a thing.

It's bittersweet. Things won't get worse, but they won't get better either.

Except Romney can help build a Supreme Court that won't try to kick over Heller, and might even vindicate the 2D A and in the process eviscerate what infringements remain.

Gary Johnson has horns and a split tongue!!!!

I guess that was meant to be tongue in cheek? I was genuinely curious. That's all I needed to hear.

 

[88GT]

Except Romney can help build a Supreme Court that won't try to kick over Heller, and might even vindicate the 2D A and in the process eviscerate what infringements remain.

Good point. We might make up a fair bit of ground with case law if there is something to that effect in the pipeline and the court's make-up is sympathetic to the cause.

 

[cobber]

Good point. We might make up a fair bit of ground with case law if there is something to that effect in the pipeline and the court's make-up is sympathetic to the cause.

In fact the court could systematically strike down federal and state anti-2d A legislation, assuming the right makeup of the court and a series of court challenges.

It's fairly certain this would NOT happen under Obama.

 

[sepe]

I guess that was meant to be tongue in cheek? I was genuinely curious. That's all I needed to hear.

Yes it was tongue in cheek. Without a bunch of digging I'm not finding too much that isn't biased (left or right) or from his camp not really getting too far into things besides the Governor Veto thing.

 

[rambone]

Mitt Romney is a Republican version of Bill Clinton. In fact, Romney supported all of Clinton's attacks on the gun rights, and advocated some of his own. These men totally reject the spirit of the 2nd Amendment (despite their election year lies).

If Romney were a Democrat (an actual out-of-the-closet Democrat), gun owners would put his face on posters next to Mao, Hitler, and Stalin, captioned, "The Experts Agree! Gun Control Works!" (Just like they do with Obama.)



Supported the FEDERAL Assault Weapons Ban (2007)
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgZ6AuHnmk0[/ame]

Supported the FEDERAL Brady Gun Control Bill (2007)
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxtB_hk-HS0"]www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxtB_hk-HS0[/ame]

Supported FEDERAL Ballistics Fingerprinting (2002)
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4YOl8P22dI"]www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4YOl8P22dI[/ame]



Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban
"Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

In fact the court could systematically strike down federal and state anti-2d A legislation, assuming the right makeup of the court and a series of court challenges.

It's fairly certain this would NOT happen under Obama.

Just like the struck down the refusal to buy health care "tax"... Thank god we have a conservative majority in the court, otherwise Obama/Romney care would be law.

 

[cobber]

Just like the struck down the refusal to buy health care "tax"... Thank god we have a conservative majority in the court, otherwise Obama/Romney care would be law.

Whatever you think of the current SCOTUS, four more years of Obama, with two-three new appointments would be more of the same but more so.

Roberts wasn't a Romney appointee. Sotomayor and Kagan were Obama appointees.

I guess better the devil you know than the one you don't?

Mitt Romney is a Republican version of Bill Clinton.

Don't you get tired of posting this stuff? Do you suppose you're persuading anyone at this point? How about showing us the better alternative, rather than sniping at the two mainstream candidates?

Assuming you get a Johnson presidency... well my guess is the asteroid impact is more likely.


I'm struck by the glaring absence of Johnson videos on these issues. Has he ever actually made a statement on any issues? (Please don't harp on the debate lock-out...)

 

[Hotdoger]

Except Romney can help build a Supreme Court that won't try to kick over Heller, and might even vindicate the 2D A and in the process eviscerate what infringements remain.


I guess that was meant to be tongue in cheek? I was genuinely curious. That's all I needed to hear.

The one thing crazy joe got right in his "debate" with Ryan.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Just curious. Aside from bromides from the true believers, what was Gary Johnson's record in New Mexico?

Does anyone have clean hands in the debate, except for those who aren't actually playing the game (ie, politics)?

I guess I was the only one that watched him on the Wilkow show the other night. When he was asked about the second amendment, he said good things, he did not mention any legislation he would be championing if he were elected.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...40897-gary_johnson_on_glenn_beck_tonight.html

 

[cobber]

I guess I was the only one that watched him on the Wilkow show the other night. When he was asked about the second amendment, he said good things, he did not mention any legislation he would be championing if he were elected.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...40897-gary_johnson_on_glenn_beck_tonight.html

Would he champion a SCOTUS to roll back unconstitutional State law infringements? Would he actively undo current federal laws and regulations? If not, how would he be preferable to the major party candidates?


From your summary in the thread you posted, it sounds like less big government, but still big government.

 

[chraland51]

It all comes down to this for me....Mitt Romney was about my 4th or 5th choice when the repukelican campaign started. Now, like it or not, I am stuck with him as my candidate. I really only have two choices....Obama or Romney. I do not like anything about Obama from his hidden past to his political views. I like about half the things that I know about Romney. Guess who I am forced to vote for.