"I will never buy a Robinson Armament product."

imported post

With permission;

Dear Mr. Robinson:
You may think "There's no one in the country who knows more about this subject [i.e., firearms policy] or who can talk about it more intelligently than I can." But, you obviously have a lot to learn about politics and politicians. Knowledge of firearms policy does not make you knowledgeable about politics or politicians.

Yes, I have heard the arguments that one needs to judge a candidate by the totality of his positions, not just one position. But, when a candidate can be as wrong as Mitt Romney is on the Second Amendment, then the candidate can not be trusted to be right or stay right on any issue of principle.

My money will only go to help those firearms manufacturers who actually support our right to keep and bear arms by both their words and their actions. You fail to support your words with your actions.

Your continued support of Mitt Romney shows me you are not to be trusted when it comes to protecting our right to keep and bear arms. Thus, I will NEVER buy a Robinson Armament product and thereby help you help the likes of Mitt Romney.

I will be sure to let others know of your support of Mitt Romney since you seem to be so proud of it.

Sincerely, Robert D. Butler, J.D.

Although I write the above in a personal capacity, a little personal history may be of interest to you. I am:
current VP of GrassRoots GunRights South Carolina (the largest pro gun rights organization in South Carolina)
current legislative liaison for Mid Carolina Rifle Club (a club that holds high power rifle competitions every month)
former president of Palmetto State Marksmans Association (a club dedicated to high power rifle competition)
former BOD member of Gun Owners of South Carolina

Click to expand...

Robinson's website is http://www.robarm.com/XCR_Mitt_Romney.htm


Edited for format

imported post

So, is this company an offshoot of Ruger? :uhoh:

imported post

Thanks for posting, Doug. Any background would be great!

imported post

http://www.robarm.com/XCR_Mitt_Romney.htm



After posting the following statement in support of Mitt Romney on http://www.xcrforum.com, and http://www.ar15.com, I've received lots of input, mostly negative regarding Mitt Romney. Much of it could be regarded as hate mail. My email box is so full I can hardly get through it. Though not all of the comments are kindly written, I am, nevertheless, very thankful for all who have taken their time to write and post.
Our common goal, if I dare state it, is to get someone in the Whitehouse who will say no to gun bans (and fix the rest of the problems our country faces). Before supporting Romney, I asked his staff for his position on firearms. I was given the statement which I have linked below in July.)
Two of your comments have trouble me: 1) That he did sign a ban of "Assault Weapons" in Mass.; and 2) He stated he would sign anti-gun legislation if it came across his desk on "Meet the Press." I was not aware of this comment on "Meet the Press."
I have forwarded your (and my) concerns to his staff by email. I have asked for a clear statement that he will support and not ban the assault weapons. I also spoke to one of his top staffers who is in Iowa today. He promises a quick response.
I do still believe that in general Mitt Romney is the most qualified candidate for President. However, if he will not state unequivocally that he will protect and not ban our beloved assault rifles, I will not be able to continue to support him.
I will post any reply I get here. I thank you all for your fervor in protecting the Second Amendment. Be assured that I stand by you in this effort.
I sincerely hope for the sake of America that we can protect this most vital of all liberties.
Sincerely,
Alex J. Robinson
Manager
Robinson Armament Co.

8:36 a.m. Jan 3, 2007
Here's the initial response from Romney's team:
I'll try to get more info for you... but I doubt if I can get a response out of Boston today. They are just neck-deep in the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire. But, I'll take a look at some of those articles.

Thanks for taking a shot or two on behalf of Mitt--it's an important work you're doing. We are very grateful for your support. If we can't get a response before Wednesday, ***** and I will both be in Boston and collect some extra facts.

Talk to you soon!
*****************
Here was my response back to their campaign staff.

I just finished viewing Mitt's statements on "Meet the Press." See You Tube Clip http://youtube.com/watch?v=F9Ygw9CQ9po

No wonder the gun owners are so angry with Mitt and me for supporting him. He comes right out and says he'd sign and Assault Weapon Ban and ban any other "weapon of high lethality" or something to that effect.

I hate to say it but what Mitt said couldn't have caused much more damage. All he had to say was that he would protect the lawful ownership of firearms and prosecute those who misuse firearms. He didn't have to alienate a huge portion of his current and potential support base.

Do you realize that the Democrats who voted for the Federal Assault Weapon Ban in 1994 were run out of office in the next few years precisely because of angry gun owners? Do you have any idea how active gun owners are politically? Do your realize that the Department of Justice determined that the 10 years of the ban had no positive effect on crime? The reason the Assault Weapon Ban wasn't re-instated is that most of the Democrats were too scared to vote for it again and the Justice Department found it unenforceable and unnecessary.

Mitt is not running for the Governor of Massachusetts. He's running for the President of the United States. There's no need to cater to the ultra-liberal left. He's not going to get that vote anyway. He seems very ill advised to have made the statements he made.

I've asked you campaign guys several times to clarify this Assault Rifle issue. You guys kept sending me Mitt's statement on the Second Amendment. If Mitt really doesn't feel the Second Amendment applies to Assault Rifles, I wish you would have made that clear when I asked the question at least twice before.
Now I've stuck my neck out in support of Mitt trying to make a small difference in these primaries. I had no idea that gun owners were so angry at Mitt. You cannot believe the email I'm getting from current and potential customers. They've threatened to stop buying our products and sell the ones they have. They've threatened everything short of killing me. I kid you not.

Whoever is in charge of firearms policy for Mitt's campaign needs to talk to me and fast. There's no one in the country who knows more about this subject or who can talk about it more intelligently than I can.

Sincerely,

Alex J. Robinson
Manager
Robinson Armament Co.

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

Our common goal, if I dare state it, is to get someone in the Whitehouse who will say no to gun bans (and fix the rest of the problems our country faces).

Click to expand...

And a man who OPENLY AND UNABASHADLYSUPPORTS A FEDERAL RIFLE BAN fits that criteria how??!!!

imported post

ama-gi wrote:

Doug Huffman wrote:

Our common goal, if I dare state it, is to get someone in the Whitehouse who will say no to gun bans (and fix the rest of the problems our country faces).

Click to expand...

And a man who OPENLY AND UNABASHADLYSUPPORTS A FEDERAL RIFLE BAN fits that criteria how??!!!

Click to expand...

The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense, no? :?

imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:

ama-gi wrote:

Doug Huffman wrote:

Our common goal, if I dare state it, is to get someone in the Whitehouse who will say no to gun bans (and fix the rest of the problems our country faces).

Click to expand...

And a man who OPENLY AND UNABASHADLYSUPPORTS A FEDERAL RIFLE BAN fits that criteria how??!!!

Click to expand...

The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense, no? :?

Click to expand...

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

I get angry. Then I remember: He lost Iowa after spending a TON of money (much of it his own) and lost to a man who had barely spent anything (a man who just so happens to have a record on gun freedom that is second only to Ron Paul's).

Then I remember that he's losing in NH (and his entire strategy rested on winning Iowa and New Hampshire). Then I smile

imported post

ama-gi wrote:

Thanks for posting, Doug. Any background would be great!

Click to expand...

It turns out that Robinson may be a fellow Mormon.

I do not have permission to post a private communication on this topic. Believe nothing that you read or hear without verifying it yourself unless it fits your pre-existing world view.

There are other SC OCDO denizens that may be privy to the same suggestion, Perhaps he will wriTe111.

Robinson has continued to carp and crawfish on his website.

imported post

Thank you for contacting me about the important issue of gun ownership and the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. I appreciate your interest in my campaign for President and would like to extend my sincere gratitude for taking the time to share your views with me.

I support the Second Amendment as one of the most basic and fundamental rights of every American. It's essential to our functioning as a free society, as are all the liberties enumerated in the Bill of Rights. I am proud to be among the many decent, law-abiding men and women who safely use firearms.

I firmly believe in the importance of responsible gun ownership and sales. I recognize there are people in this country who want to remove all guns in our society and I think they're wrong. Washington needs to distinguish between law-abiding gun owners and criminals who use guns. Those who use a firearm during the commission of crime must be punished severely. The key is to provide law enforcement with the resources they need and punish criminals, not burden lawful gun owners.

As Governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, I stood up for the rights of gun owners and sportsmen over burdensome bureaucratic regulation. I advanced legislation that expanded the rights of gun owners in my state and I've been proud to have the support of pro-Second Amendment and sportsmen's groups in my previous runs for public office. I also designated May 7 as "The Right to Bear Arms Day" in Massachusetts to honor "the right of decent, law-abiding citizens to own and use firearms in defense of their families, persons, and property and for all lawful purposes, including the common defense."

One of the most active fronts in the fight to preserve our Second Amendment rights today is being waged in the courts. As President, I'll appoint strict constructionist judges who will follow the Constitution and not legislate from the bench. I'll also fight to repeal the McCain-Feingold law, which sought to impose restrictions on the First Amendment rights of groups like the National Rifle Association, to advocate for issues we care about.

I am running for President because I fervently believe that I have the experience and vision to address the issues facing our country. Throughout my years in both the private and public sectors, I have been successful by pursuing innovation and transformation. If there ever was a time when innovation and transformation were needed in government, it is now.

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to visit my website at www.MittRomney.com for updated information on Second Amendment rights and other issues that may be of interest to you. I look forward to hearing from you in the future, and earning your support.
Sincerely,



Paid for by Romney for President, Inc.
www.MittRomney.com


[/code]

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

As Governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, I stood up for the rights of gun owners and sportsmen over burdensome bureaucratic regulation. I advanced legislation that expanded the rights of gun owners in my state and I've been proud to have the support of pro-Second Amendment and sportsmen's groups in my previous runs for public office.

Click to expand...

Huh? McCain was right: Romney is definitey the candidate of change.

imported post

I want to see a statement from Romney, on the record, that says, "I will not sign any firearms bans, and will veto any such bans crossing my desk if I am elected president."

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

I want to see a statement from Romney, on the record, that says, "I will not sign any firearms bans, and will veto any such bans crossing my desk if I am elected president."

Click to expand...

He made such a pledge regarding abortion to the people of Massachusetts. Then broke it. He changes his mind quite often and he does so without remorse.

I wouldn't trust such a statement if he swore on a stack of Bibles stacked on top ofa stack of Books of Mormon

Besides!!! HE HAS ALREADY STATED IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT HE WOULD SUPPORT - NOT JUST SIGN, BUT SUPPORT - A FEDERAL RIFLE BAN.

Howdoes everyone not know this by now? :banghead: No wonder Romney's a "front runner"

imported post

ama-gi wrote:

deepdiver wrote:

I want to see a statement from Romney, on the record, that says, "I will not sign any firearms bans, and will veto any such bans crossing my desk if I am elected president."

Click to expand...

He made such a pledge regarding abortion to the people of Massachusetts. Then broke it. He changes his mind quite often and he does so without remorse.

I wouldn't trust such a statement if he swore on a stack of Bibles stacked on top ofa stack of Books of Mormon

Besides!!! HE HAS ALREADY STATED IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT HE WOULD SUPPORT - NOT JUST SIGN, BUT SUPPORT - A FEDERAL RIFLE BAN.

Howdoes everyone not know this by now? :banghead: No wonder Romney's a "front runner"

Click to expand...

I was commenting in response to the OP and Robinson's comments on his web page. I'm trying to find a way to be willing to vote for Romney if he got the nomination. I am well aware of Romney's record on 2nd Amendment issues and between that and his illegal immigration positions make him unpalatable despite other positives. He will not get my vote in the primary.

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

He will not get my vote in the primary.

Click to expand...

If he gets the nom, he won't get my vote in the general. I think it would be extremely damaging to change the Republican Platform to support an AWB.

imported post

That is what I am fighting with. If he gets the nomination, given how much worse the dem candidates would be on 2nd Amendment issues, among others, and given the possibility of a SCOTUS nomination in the next 4 years, I just don't know what I will do. In a less critical election or with less radical dem nominees, I would likely do a write in vote or a protest vote. Not easy decisions given how much is at stake on many levels. I'm really tired of voting against someone rather than voting for someone.

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

That is what I am fighting with. If he gets the nomination, given how much worse the dem candidates would be on 2nd Amendment issues, among others, and given the possibility of a SCOTUS nomination in the next 4 years, I just don't know what I will do. In a less critical election or with less radical dem nominees, I would likely do a write in vote or a protest vote. Not easy decisions given how much is at stake on many levels. I'm really tired of voting against someone rather than voting for someone.

Click to expand...

First, Hillary is NOT worse than Romney on the gun issue. She may even be better given the Clinton's history of triangulation. PLUS, Hillary could never do as much damage as Romney because she can't change the Republican platform to support gun control, leaving no opponents to gun control. Romney can.

It would NOT be a protest vote to me. I would vote for the candidate I support. I'm willing to compromise on a few things, but a permenant rifle ban is not one of them.

imported post

Hillary absolutely will sign the AWB pending in the house now. She voted for a 10 year extention of the AWB. Hillary believes she has a better chance of re-election if she takes our guns. That is where Romney is very different. He is going to know that he won't see a second term if he signs AWB. While I agree that there is serious damage electing a GOP anti-gunner, there is also serious damage electing a dem who supports weapon bans, has made comments that could be construed as supporting confiscation (and I personally believe she supports such measures) and who is going to appoint leftist anti-2A judges to SCOTUS if given a chance. I haven't made up my mind as I said. But actually voting FOR any of the dem leaders would be anathema to every constitutional and patriotic belief I have.

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

That is where Romney is very different. He is going to know that he won't see a second term if he signs AWB.

Click to expand...

That's nonsense. If that was the case, he'd "know" he wouldn't get a first term by stating over and over and over that he supports an AWB. Here's what I got from a 15 second google search:

"So I'm a hunter and believe in Second Amendment rights, but I also believe that assault weapons are not needed in the public population." -- Mitt Romney

If he felt he couldn't get elected with this position, he'd change it. That much we know about Romney. So he's sure he's in the clear. If he gets elected the first time with this position, he'll feel comfortable.

And this is another reason I'd rather have Hillary than Romney: Dems will always be somewhat anti-gun, to the extent they think it's politically viable. Republicans are generally pro-gun because they don't think they can get elected otherwise. If Romney gets elected, we lose the advantage of having Republicans on our side so often and we lose alot of clout as a voting bloc.

imported post

You make some good points ama-gi. While I would never vote for Hillary or Obama because I find their entire platforms anti-liberty, freedom and capitalism, in short, socialistic beyond the wildest dreams of 1950/60s American Communist Party goals, I may choose to not vote against either one of them because of considerations as you have enumerated and some other long term politically strategic reasons. It is going to be a tough decision.