Ted Cruz is a co-sponsor of S.498, the nationwide reciprocity act. I know some here think anything to do with permits is akin to being in bed with HCI. But I believe permits have been a valuable stepping stone. I believe congress should act under their 14th amendment power to protect our 2nd amendment RKBA nationwide. I believe that should be permit-free carry. But I will happily accept nationwide recognition of my permit as an incremental improvement.
Put another way, every anti-gun organization of which I'm aware, hates and opposes this bill and it sponsors and co-sponsors. Our opponents are not stupid. If they strongly oppose something, we ought to consider on whether it is really a bad bill, or merely not the bill we hope to see passed ultimately.
He is a sponsor of S.2006 that imposes penalties on IRS personnel who target individuals or groups based on political ideology. Not directly on target for RKBA, but an important safeguard for pro-RKBA organizations that have feared coming under attack after conservative organizations have been targeted by the present administration.
He is a co-sponsor of S.2298 which sets clear mens rea (state of mind) requirements for conviction of crimes. Again, not directly affecting RKBA, but an important safeguard of liberty and starts to establish a standard on which we should build. Imagine the number of crimes that would effectively disappear if we could require proof of willful intent to violate (some very obscure) law in most cases, rather than the blanket "ignorance is no excuse".
Is a co-sponsor of S-Rest 287 that condemns the murders on the Umpqua Community College campus in Oregon, without attacking RKBA or lawful ownership of firearms.
Is a sponsor of S.2416, Free Speech for All Act. This is not an RKBA bill. It requires that individual citizens enjoy all the political freedom of speech afforded to major media corporations, and that any speech regulations found unconstitutional when applied against media are also void against citizens. Pro-RKBA organizations including the NRA and GOA have feared that limits on political speech could limit their ability to communicate effectively with their membership, or to advertise to the general public regarding candidates' records. Even independent websites such as this forum have faced some risk of being subjected to political speech limits. Imagine if our host were legally obliged to prevent any discussion of candidates' records within 6 months of an election? Or if discussions could be deemed to be political endorsements or contributions subject to federal campaign finance limits.
I know the OP is about Cruz's specific positions, actions, or statements on OC and permit-free carry. It is a fair question.
But we should also be politically savvy enough to recognize that just as we discuss many tangential issues with great interest because of their relationship to our RKBA and other freedoms generally, so too there are many legislative and political fronts in the battle to protect, restore, and advance those rights. And in some cases, seemingly tangential efforts may be as or more important in the long run than efforts that are directly on point.
At this point, we don't get to pick a perfect candidate for POTUS. We are going to get to choose between Hillary (or maybe Bernie, but probably Hillary) on the Democrat side, and maybe Trump, Cruz, or Rubio on the GOP side. No other person has any appreciable chance of being the next president of the USA. We can argue about what odds any of these 5 have. And that would probably just depress us as we realize how high a risk we face of having either Hillary or Bernie as the next president. But the next president of the USA is going to be named Hillary, Bernie, Trump, Cruz, or Rubio. That person will almost surely appoint at least one key member to the SCOTUS, and perhaps as many as 3 or 4 members to that court.
Among the 5 names who have any chance of winning, who is the best (or least bad if it comes to that) on RKBA, and then on other questions of individual liberty, the economy, and national security? For those who haven't yet voted in a party primary/caucus, the question of which candidate is most supportable is very important since there is some chance, I think, to get a good nominee on the GOP side, rather than getting to November and facing the choice between two bad candidates.
Charles