Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Iowa 2A advocates: BOB VANDER PLAATS - "I Will Sign Vermont Style, No Permit Required Legislati

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Iowa, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Iowa second amendment advocates:
    [/b]
    As you know, we now have (or rather soon will have), a “shall issue” CCW law in this state. Make no mistake about it: this was brought about because of INTENSE lobbying efforts brought to bear on the anti-gun Democrats (and some “RINO” Republicans like Clel Baudler) to get the law changed. But the law STILL does not recognize the second amendment right of Iowans to bear arms without governmentmandated training and continuing to beg for permission prior to exercising your 2A right. Clearly, more work remains to be done. At this point in time, there is only ONE gubernatorial candidate who has explicitly stated his support for the full recognition of the second amendment in Iowa: Bob Vander Plaats.[/b] You can pretty much be guaranteed that Terry Branstad will not support the Sorenson “Real Right to Carry Bill” . . . otherwise, he would release a press release to that effect. Culver? . . . he’s done . . . ‘nuff said.

    If second amendment advocates truly want to change the unconstitutional laws in this state to fully recognize the second amendment, it is IMPERITIVE that you get involved in the June primary.

    Do not sit this one out!!! If you want to continue to improve Iowa’s gun laws, support and vote for Bob Vander Plaats in the June primary!
    [/b]




    VANDER PLAATS TO CULVER: SIGN THE ‘SHALL ISSUE” RIGHT-TO-CARRY SECOND AMENDMENT LEGISLATION NOW




    DES MOINES – With the deadline looming for Governor Chet Culver to sign into law bills that passed during the 2010 legislative session, Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats today called on the governor to sign Senate File 2379, Iowa’s “shall issue” right-to-carry bill.

    The bill, which would standardize the process of issuing concealed carry permits for all Iowa counties, would require sheriffs to issue a permit to carry to all applicants unless they are subject to certain disqualifications.

    Vander Plaats said, “Our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is not subject to the political winds or the whims of a governor, and must be protected for future generations.” Pointing out that the bill would ensure that all law-abiding Iowans would have equal access to a concealed carry permit, Vander Plaats continued, “Our state government should facilitate the exercise of the rights our Founding Fathers clearly spelled out in the Constitution, and this bill helps to take the guesswork out of acquiring a permit.”

    Acknowledging the passionate debate that occurred this session, Vander Plaats said, “I know there are those who don’t think a law-abiding citizen ought to have to ask permission to exercise a constitutional right, and if a right-to-carry bill like the one sponsored by state Rep. Kent Sorenson comes to my desk as governor, I will sign it. The bill that passed this session though is a step in the right direction, and if I were governor, I would have signed it already.”[/b]
    [/b]

    Governor Culver has until Thursday to sign Senate File 2379. His failure to do so would serve as a de facto veto.



    # # # #



    Paid for by Team Vander Plaats

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    Huh, another school teacher, like the current Governor.

    What has Vander Plaats ever DONE to show his support of the 2nd Amendment?

    I know what Vander Plaats has SAID about supporting the 2nd Amendment. What has he DONE to actually support it?

    Vander Plaats on his own Web Site says this:

    FOR a state “shall carry” law that protects Iowans’ Second Amendment rights so they are not subject to the current arbitrary, county-by-county process in which sheriffs can deny gun permits to law-abiding citizens.

    http://teamvp2010.com/issues/leadership-1/

    Yet somehow, SS thinks Vander Plaats is a strong 2nd Amendment supporter, EVEN THOUGH Vander Plaats supports a "Shall Carry" law!

    LOL!!!!


    BTW, what was the date of Vander Plaats quote when he told Culver to sign the "Shall Issue" Bill?







  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Geez, Max, are you incapable of reading? So quick to jump on your "worst enemy" SS that you can't even read what is noted in RED? Like many of us, VanderPlaats' comments shows his support forthe good part of so-called "shall issue" legislation (I would note how proud several sheriffs are of their ability to "get past" the requirements...Dubuque & Marshall co sheriffs aren't worried, and have made it very clear they will continue on course denying permits, LOL to IC/NRA) while still being willing to push for full Constitutional carry. Branstad, as I recall, vetoed loosening restrictions on carry.

    I will tell you I am royally pissed about having to go thru training again (I got a 93 on my shooting test in the 1990s). Point at bad guy, pull the trigger. How hard is that? My life is very full already, and the elusive "training requirements" is like being force to go thru freakin drivers ed every time you renew your drivers license. Totally sucks, but I'll bet IC & the NRA will be AWOL on thefightforthe Sorenson bill, or even the fight to remove the training next session.NRA'll cut Gronstal a check & disappear.

    I would suggest you take a breather and decide what your purpose is here...to poke atthose that should be yourallies in the good fight, or to move forward for real Constitutional carry. You've obviously lost your perspective, so I will give you an outsider's view. The bad guys don't get permits and don't worry about training, and IC & NRA's absolute refusal to work with IGO on a GREAT BILL screwed all of us while providing the democrats the opportunity to call themselves pro-gun when we know better. Thanks so much for your fervent support for that crap, Max. I hope you drop off the face of the earth before next legislative session. One less jerk to step over in the good fight.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    Farmgirl must not have read SS's other posts, where he declared Iowa Carry and the NRA as opposing the 2nd Amendment because they supported Shall Issue.

    Funny how SS now is an advocate for Vander Plaats, when Vander Plaats said he supported Shall Issue too, in fact, Vander Plaats called for Culver to sign the Shall Issue Bill.

    And SS also asked a good question on another post. How can you believe what someone SAYS? (Especially a politician campaigning for office!)

    Usually you look at someone's record, how they have voted ongun issues in the past, or what they might have actually DONE to support gun rights. Unfortunately, Vander Plaats has no record of either.

    SS/Farmgirl, do continue though, to talk out of both sides of your mouths.





  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Max G wrote:
    Farmgirl must not have read SS's other posts, where he declared Iowa Carry and the NRA as opposing the 2nd Amendment because they supported Shall Issue.

    Funny how SS now is an advocate for Vander Plaats, when Vander Plaats said he supported Shall Issue too, in fact, Vander Plaats called for Culver to sign the Shall Issue Bill.

    And SS also asked a good question on another post. How can you believe what someone SAYS? (Especially a politician campaigning for office!)

    Usually you look at someone's record, how they have voted ongun issues in the past, or what they might have actually DONE to support gun rights. Unfortunately, Vander Plaats has no record of either.

    SS/Farmgirl, do continue though, to talk out of both sides of your mouths.



    "Farmgirl must not have read SS's other posts, where he declared Iowa Carry and the NRA as opposing the 2nd Amendment because they supported Shall Issue."


    Please show me that post and substantiate your claim.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Iowa, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Farmgirl wrote:
    "Farmgirl must not have read SS's other posts, where he declared Iowa Carry and the NRA as opposing the 2nd Amendment because they supported Shall Issue."


    Please show me that post and substantiate your claim.
    He can't Farmgirl . . . I never said any such thing. He used to be just a moron . . . now he is a lying moron.

    You have to recognize that Maxie represents the Village Idiotwing of Iowa Carry . . .

    SS

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Iowa, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Max G wrote:
    SS/Farmgirl, do continue though, to talk out of both sides of your mouths.
    Maxie -

    I can't speak for FG, but I'll assure you that I'll keep talking out of my mouth . . .and I am pretty sure we can count on you tokeep talking out of your arse!

    XXOO

    SS

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    Straight_Shooter
    Posted: Sat Apr 3rd, 2010 06:59 pm



    And, of course, not that you loudmouths care, but the anti-gun Democrats are already heading back to their districts and crooning about how "they gave gun owners in Iowa what they wanted," which means that the charges of "anti-gun" will never be allowed to stick, and we are stuck with the worthless POS' once again . . . so . . . in total . . . "your"law continues to suck . . . and so does the arrogant NRA and Iowa Carry . . . I only hope one day that we can get true defenders of freedom and the second amendment to see beyond your statist crap.

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum23/39340-1.html







    So yes it does appear that SS will continue to speak out of BOTH sides of his mouth.



    -According to SS, when Iowa Carry and the NRA


    support the Shall Issue Bill = BAD!The Shall Issue BillSucks!



    -According to SS, when Bob Vander Plaats


    supports the SAME Shall Issue Bill = GREAT! Elect BOB For GOVERNOR!


    SS was Against the Shall Issue Bill, until he and Vander Plaats were For the Shall Issue Bill.



    (BTW, what was the date of Vander Plaats quote when he told Culver to sign the "Shall Issue" Bill?)





  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Wow, MaxICApologist, that's a stretch of interpretation. You must be a lawyer. Your accusation and the quote you bring forward as proof do not match at all. I don't have the time you children do, so I don't know which form of the IC/NRA bill SS was referring to, but the first few drafts of the so-called shall issue NRA bill sucked worse than the existing law, to a level that could certainly be called anti-gun, as they most definitely made the law worse, not better. You don'timprove the law by taking one step forward and 5backward.

    I have personally been victim of crappy "moderate" gun laws like the one passed, spent an afternoon in jail and $5000 in court costs to defend (and win) my gun case, so I see things differently than those of you who defend the backwards steps to make the liberals happy. When you come within spitting distance of losing your rights forever you tend to not tolerate the BS you IC NRA folks fork out. Hope you are prepared at IC & NRA to pony up money for court costs when control-freak sheriffs continue to deny permits andIowans have to appeal to the courts to attain their God-given rights. But I will bet you won't.

    I once thought the NRA was a professional lobbying organization, but after seeing the disaster of a bill they presented, and their incompetent efforts to alter/amend the really bad bill, I have changed my opinion. They suck, and don't understand current interpretations of laws across the United States AT ALL. (The alternative is that they are just plain moderately anti-freedom, and I wouldn't like to think that.) In total, the new bill does make things worse forme, as I have a permit-friendly sheriff, and am HATE the training requirement.

    I am a VanderPlaats supporter, and have talked to him in depth about the issue. He is tight with Sorenson, who does "get" the issue. He's not a gunnie (none of the candidates are) but supports freedom and decreased bureaucracy which translates into lower enforcement costs and lessgovernment. Again, I have little doubt the wimps atIC will disappear next legislative session, having declared the new "almost-shall-issue" law a real victory.Bob, like Sorenson, supported the final NRAbill, even while stating directly that he would supportand sign the better Constitutional carry Sorenson bill. Smart position for a man seeking statewide office, rather than the divide and conquer the allies like the IC/NRA folks have used,instead of supporting the Sorenson bill and uniting behind the best bill that nearly all 2A supporters could support.I can only assume that you, like Baudler, REALLY think that YOU should be able to carry, and that "not everyone should be able to carry" and thatYOU should be able to decide who and where and when...an elitist point of view that is realprevalent today.Hey, even Obama "believes in the 2nd amendment" like you do...just need a few "reasonable" regulations...



  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    Farmgirl wrote:
    Wow, MaxICApologist, that's a stretch of interpretation. You must be a lawyer. Your accusation and the quote you bring forward as proof do not match at all. I don't have the time you children do, so I don't know which form of the IC/NRA bill SS was referring to,


    The SS quote in the above post is from 4/3/2010. SF 2379 was passed in it's final form on 3/29/2010.

    SS said this was a Bad Bill, when he attacked Iowa Carry and the NRA on 4/3. Now many of SS posts and even entire topics were deleted by the moderators, and many were also self-deleted by SS (due to embarrassment no doubt), but you must be blind if you have not seen the attacks SS has madeon Iowa Carry, the NRA, and Shall Issue for the last 5 or 6 months.

    This very same Bill SF2379 was clearly supported by Vander Plaats. But somehow, SF2379 is a great Bill, when Vander Plaats supports it.

    Now, beyond this hypocracy of SS, the fact that Vander Plaats has no legislative voting record to gauge his campaign promises to support the 2nd Amendment and Shall Issue, and now the latest promise - Constitutional Carry, how do you know Vander Plaats really supports 2nd Amendment rights? (Even SS questioned the value of campaign promises on another topic.)



    Note also the Unanswered Question from SS - When did Vander Plaats first claim to support SF 2379? Source?


    And one final comment for FG and SS, should the McDonald case pending reviewin the Supreme Courtnot support the enforcement of the 2nd Amendment against State infringement, then on what basis would you advance an Alaska type Bill in Iowa?


    Or McDonald could be favorable to supporters of the 2nd Amendment, however, the Heller Case left the door wide open to the courts allowing "reasonable regulation" on the 2nd Amendment. So McDonald still may not save our rights.

    Thus my recommendation, which I firmly believe the NRA and Iowa Carry would support next- Pass a State Constitutional Amendment to protect the RTKBA first. THEN, pass the Alaska type Bill. Or even better, build in the Right to Carry with no permit into the State RTKBA Constitutional Amendment.

    Meanwhile, as even Vander Plaats admittted, the Shall Issue Law in Iowa is a good step in the right direction.













  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Iowa, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Max G wrote:


    SS was Against the Shall Issue Bill, until he and Vander Plaats were For the Shall Issue Bill.

    You just keep right on lying Maxie . . . and I'll keep on showing you to be a liar: from my post of Monday, Nov 30th, 2009 . . . and I quote:

    “As far as me having a "vendetta" against the NRA and IC, I don't. I DO have a vendetta against their compromising legislation, that will affect me if it passes. I have stated many times herethat I would find IC's "shall issue" desire to be wholly acceptable, AS LONG AS I DIDN'T HAVE TO SACRIFICE OTHER FREEDOMS TO GET IT. That is the whole issue here, and one that NONE of you . . . David, Sean, Steve, Tomor yourself will address . . . you guys KNOW that this has been the approach with IC and their "relationship" with Baudler over the years. In fact, I have personally seen posts on your forum where your members would make comments on Baudler's legislation like "I wish he wouldn't put that stuff in there." You guys KNOW it is in there, and you refuse to acknowledge it here. And I have no doubt that those of you who know this history with Baudler, know full well that what I had previously posted to be in the NRA bill is really in there.”

    Proof positive that you are a liar . . .

    SS


  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Iowa, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Max G wrote:

    The SS quote in the above post is from 4/3/2010. SF 2379 was passed in it's final form on 3/29/2010.

    Now many of SS posts and even entire topics were deleted by the moderators . . .
    but you must be blind if you have not seen the attacks SS has madeon Iowa Carry, the NRA, and Shall Issue for the last 5 or 6 months.

    Now, beyond this hypocracy of SS, the fact that Vander Plaats has no legislative voting record to gauge his campaign promises to support the 2nd Amendment and Shall Issue, and now the latest promise - Constitutional Carry, how do you know Vander Plaats really supports 2nd Amendment rights? (Even SS questioned the value of campaign promises on another topic.)


    Wow! it appears that FarmGirl is a better man than Maxie!! I know . . . . I'll use pink to highlight his quotes!

    "The SS quote in the above post is from 4/3/2010."

    I stand by my statement of 4/3/2010 . . . any "shall issue" law that contains the deprivation of due process rights like this, sucks!:

    "No[/u][/u] professional or nonprofessional permit to carry weapons [/u][/u]shall be issued to a person who is subject to any of the following: . . . . Probable cause exists to believe, based upon documented specific actions of the person, where at least one of the actions occurred within two years immediately preceding the date of the permit application, that the person is likely to use a weapon unlawfully or in such other manner as would endanger the person's self or others."

    Maxie can blather all he wants, but the anti-gun sheriffs are going to use this to the hilt to deny gun permits . . . and they are all ready making public their plans to do so:


    "CedarCounty Sheriff Warren Wethington said last week on WHO radio regarding the new gun bill, "We still have discretion [to deny permits], really the only difference is we have to put it in writing [why we are denying] and show the person..."

    "Now many of SS posts and even entire topics were deleted by the moderators"

    True . . .except Maxie Mermidon very conveniently leaves out 2 facts:

    1) The posts of mine that were deleted were the direct response to attacks by Iowa Carry and NRAmembers on me, and IGO, that were also deleted at the same time. The moderator was only stopping the attacks on me and my rebuttals to those attacks.

    2) Maxie was the whining simp that went every time to tattle that "Straight Shooter is being too hard on poor little me," after he and his cadre attacked me personally . . . Oh Oh Maxie . . . you'd better go tattle on me again!

    "but you must be blind if you have not seen the attacks SS has madeon Iowa Carry, the NRA, and Shall Issue for the last 5 or 6 months."

    Maxie continues to propogate this outright lie, and every time he posts it, I am going to respond with the truth:

    From my post of Monday, Nov 30th, 2009 . . . and I quote:

    “As far as me having a "vendetta" against the NRA and IC, I don't. I DO have a vendetta against their compromising legislation, that will affect me if it passes. I have stated many times herethat I would find IC's "shall issue" desire to be wholly acceptable, AS LONG AS I DIDN'T HAVE TO SACRIFICE OTHER FREEDOMS TO GET IT. That is the whole issue here, and one that NONE of you . . . David, Sean, Steve, Tomor yourself will address . . . you guys KNOW that this has been the approach with IC and their "relationship" with Baudler over the years. In fact, I have personally seen posts on your forum where your members would make comments on Baudler's legislation like "I wish he wouldn't put that stuff in there." You guys KNOW it is in there, and you refuse to acknowledge it here. And I have no doubt that those of you who know this history with Baudler, know full well that what I had previously posted to be in the NRA bill is really in there.”

    Q.E.D. - Maxie is a liar

    "Now, beyond this hypocracy of SS, the fact that Vander Plaats has no legislative voting record to gauge his campaign promises to support the 2nd Amendment and Shall Issue, and now the latest promise - Constitutional Carry, how do you know Vander Plaats really supports 2nd Amendment rights?"

    As was thoroughly expected, Maxie is building his unbelieveable case for supporting Culver in the general election, because in his feeble brain, "Culver has actually done something for the second amendment" . . . that is how twisted all this refusal to accept the fact that IC's law in no way recognized the second amendment in Iowa is and where it has landed us. . . Maxie is a perfect case studyas to why we can't move away from the nanny state that we currently live in here in Iowa . . . like so many with the statist mindset, he lives in world all by himself filled with grand delusions, that have no basis in reality.



    SS

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    Nice colors from SS.


    You are Guilty as charged I see.


    You attacked those who supported Shall Issue, until your boy Vander Plaats supported it too.


    Your rants are getting more colorful though, I'll give you that much credit.





  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    I bet Vander Plaats just loves the support SS has provided to him in this forum!



    Now, for the THIRD TIME, I'll ask Straight Shooter:

    When did Vander Plaats first claim to support SF 2379? Source?


    What SS? Too much to ask for your source of your initial quote posted on this topic YOU introduced on Tue Apr 27th, 2010 10:13 am?


  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Iowa, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Max G wrote:
    Now, for the THIRD TIME, I'll ask Straight Shooter:

    When did Vander Plaats first claim to support SF 2379? Source?


    What SS? Too much to ask for your source of your initial quote posted on this topic YOU introduced on Tue Apr 27th, 2010 10:13 am?

    For any folks who visit here other than the above cretin, I will make a few things clear. From day one of resonding to my posts, this "apologist" for Iowa Carry and the NRA (I wonder if they really claim him?) has made one thing clear: he is not here to discuss issues of substance, but simply to personally attack me to take the focus off of the problems inherent in the Iowa Carry / NRA legislation.

    He now apparently thinks that after months of attacking me and refusing to debate the issues / legislationfor their actual content, that I will consider entering debate with him. He has very conveniently refused to answer direct questions posed to him and others about the content of the NRA/Iowa Carry bills, and nowis attacking me for ignoring his questions. Where people from Iowa Carry and the NRA have entered reasonable and intelligent debate with me here on Open Carry, I have responded in kind. The above individual has proven with plenty of past experience that he is not capable of entering reasoned debate, but prefers to make personal attacks. As he has done so, I have responded in kind.

    Case in point is this thread, where I simply posted a press release from BVP and indicated that he is our best chance for "Constitutional carry" in Iowa. After many viewings by others without comment, rather than have discussion about the gubernatorial race as it relates to gun issues, "MaxG" once again decided to try and make this thread a personal discrediting of me. For those who tire of the inability to have reasoned discussion here, I will hold out that I am fully willing to ignore "MaxG" at the point that he stops attacking me. . . .at this point in time, I will not lower myself to have any form of debate with him, because he has proven his unwillingness and inability to enter into "give and take" debate.

    Bottom line . . . he is nothing but a troll . . . .

    SS

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post


    The Vander Plaat''s press release calling on Governor Culver to sign the Shall Issue Bill was released on 4/26/2010.

    That's the same day Governor Culver already announced he was signing the Shall Issue Bill.

    Any evidence Vander Plaat's supported Shall Issue prior to 4/26/10? Or did Vander Plaat's simply jump on the band wagon after Culver already announced he was going to sign the Bill?

    Ahhh, the questions SS doesn' t want to answer about his boy!

    I suppose it could be that SS is taking the incremental approach when recommending Governors. Vander Plaats may very well be Less Worse then anyone else.

    But so far, I've seen nothing in the record of what Vander Plaats has DONE, to support any of Vander Plaats campaign promises and show that he isn't just blowing Hot Air. Certainly nothing but Hot Air was provided by SS to support Vander Plaats.



  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Iowa, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Max G wrote:

    But so far, I've seen nothing in the record of what Vander Plaats has DONE, to support any of Vander Plaats campaign promises and show that he isn't just blowing Hot Air.


    So go and cast your vote for Culver since "he supports the second amendment."

    Let me knowhow that works out for you . . . .

    SS

Posting Permissions

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