Looks to me like what was banned was indeed “assault weapons”. I don’t see where it bans anything over 10 rounds, either. And again, if it was the will of MOST voters in MA, then he was merely doing what his constituents wanted him to do. A big difference from state-level vs. national level.
I understand what you are ‘trying’ to say here. BUT....that still does not negate the FACT that Romney would have been FAR better for America than King Barry...which is, admittedly, not saying much.
But you anti-Romneyites seem to ‘think’ America is better off having Barry, instead of Mitt. If you continue to attempt to argue that point, I’m done. There’s no hope for ya.
Just sayin....
“The new law ensures these deadly weapons, including AK-47s, UZIs and Mac-10 rifles, are permanently prohibited in Massachusetts no matter what happens on the federal level.”
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/01/barack-will-never-allow-you-to-go-back-to-your-lives-as-usual/
MOST voters in one state don’t get to say part of the Bill of Rights doesn’t apply in their state. Period. Full stop. romney was contemptuous of the 2nd Amendment and the constitutional rights of the minority in his liberal bastion.
On romneycare, the simple fact that cannot be disputed is that he signed into law a bill that brings the full powers of the state to punish people and their families if they donot enter into contract with a private company. Whether or not it is permissible to do on the state level, it is reprehensible to do and speaks poorly of the character of the person commanding it to happen. I trust a thug that does something like that about as much as I would trust someone who cheats on his wife.
And for the millionth time, I never said obama was better than romney. There is just nothing in his record that says he would be any different. His record, past deeds and words, show that there is no daylight between him and obama on any substantive issue.