Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: What would ‘President Romney’ really mean for gun owners?

  1. #1
    Administrator John Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bristol, VA
    Posts
    1,735

    What would ‘President Romney’ really mean for gun owners?

    “Deadly assault weapons … are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
    - Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney
    As the Republican National Convention comes to a close, it is time for me to live up to the promise I made when I wrote aboutWhy gun owners should fear a second term for President Obama. That promise was to give the Republican nominee the same skeptical scrutiny that I gave to President Obama. And just as in that previous article, I am limiting my discussion to gun rights issues only.
    I think it is only fair to note that, going into this article, I had some preconceived notions. Surely whoever the GOP nominated would be a sympathetic figure from a gun rights perspective wouldn’t they? After all, isn’t the GOP the gun-rights party? Well as it turns out, maybe not if you are a Massachusetts republican.
    Read more at http://monachuslex.com/?p=1744

  2. #2
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Good article John.

    I have about equal faith (zero) in Romney or Obama.

    Even the ability to appoint judges. Conservative appointed Roberts, had very twisted logic to rule in favor of Federal intervention into Health Care. I remember hearing somewhere recently when he was promoting his book that he does feel that it would be constitutional to allow restriction on firearms.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  3. #3
    Administrator John Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bristol, VA
    Posts
    1,735
    I understand and share the frustration with Roberts on that ruling. But the 'conservative' justices did give us Heller and McDonald and there are other cases working their way to SCOTUS.

    We need those seats!


    John


    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Good article John.

    I have about equal faith (zero) in Romney or Obama.

    Even the ability to appoint judges. Conservative appointed Roberts, had very twisted logic to rule in favor of Federal intervention into Health Care. I remember hearing somewhere recently when he was promoting his book that he does feel that it would be constitutional to allow restriction on firearms.

  4. #4
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Administrator View Post
    I understand and share the frustration with Roberts on that ruling. But the 'conservative' justices did give us Heller and McDonald and there are other cases working their way to SCOTUS.

    We need those seats!


    John
    It is sad how narrow the decisions, on something any elementary school child could understand.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  5. #5
    Administrator John Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bristol, VA
    Posts
    1,735
    Yes ... Yes it is.


    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    It is sad how narrow the decisions, on something any elementary school child could understand.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    why?
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by Administrator View Post
    I understand and share the frustration with Roberts on that ruling. But the 'conservative' justices did give us Heller and McDonald and there are other cases working their way to SCOTUS.

    We need those seats!


    John
    +1 !!! for SCOTUS.

    VERY CRITICAL & MAJOR POINT OF FOCUS FOR THIS COMING ELECTION.

  7. #7
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    What would a Romney Presidency mean for gun owners? Very little. Assuming the standard coattail effect Rs will retain house and take senate, from which there will be NO gun control legislation, and Romney should be held in check by conservatives on any Executive orders. Don 't look for any pro-second ammendment action from the White House either.

    The BIGGEST effect will be more conservative justices appointed to all levels of the federal judiciary than Obummer would make.
    Last edited by F350; 09-03-2012 at 01:56 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    People seem to forget Romney is likely going to nominate people that share his views.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    People seem to forget Romney is likely going to nominate people that share his views.
    This



    Do you guys think Romney would appoint a justice that would strike down his own gun laws signed in mass. as unconstitutional?

    EDIT: Do you even think Romney is the one making the calls? Or is he just the current GOP puppet?
    Last edited by Schlitz; 09-03-2012 at 02:32 AM.
    “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
    [Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. Supp. 486, 489 (1956)]
    “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights.”
    [Sherar vs. Cullen, 481 F2d. 946 (1973)]

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran kimbercarrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    hampton, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    721
    I believe Obomney will be worse because most people think all Republocrts are pro gun. They will vote for him and be totally shocked when he passes anti-gun legislation because they only listen to sound bytes and don't look at track records.

    When Obomney started running over a year ago he stood by his record in Taxachusettes and he caught a lot of flak for it. As time has gone on he has modified his statements to be more palatable to the Republican masses and they have fallen for it.

    I've even heard national talk radio hosts say he has gotten his rhetoric down and now they are even swayed into supporting him even though they just basically confirmed he was just saying what Republicans want to hear.

    By voting for the evil of 2 lessors we have backed ourselves into a corner and now have no real choice to vote for by the 2 parties.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    People seem to forget Romney is likely going to nominate people that share his views.
    +10

  12. #12
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Ca Patriot View Post
    And Obama HAS appointed people who share his view.

    Dont be stupid.
    Exactly, what makes you think that Romney is going to be any different? He has been lying through his teeth since he started his campaign. His record is very similar to Obama's, except that Romney has actually had the opportunity to do more for gun control than Obama.

    Don't be stupid.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •