I haven't seen anything to indicate that he's going to veto MA's new homegrown "assualt weapons" ban.
Don't get me wrong; I'm not under the impression that Romney is conservative. Its just that for a guy whose political career depends on the far left electorate of Mass I give him credit for at least taking a stand against rewarding illegal immigration and for opposing the judicial tyranny of his states' supreme court.
Of course I've read that he supports 'civil unions', which are of course gay marriage w/o the word 'marriage.' But hey, that distinction w/o a difference is something many Americans cling to. Just look at the polls on gay marriage. A solid or overwhelming majority always opposes them, but if you use 'civil union' instead then the results vary quite a bit. Sometimes they are oppposed by a majority or plurality, sometimes they are supported by a majority or plurality. So in that sense, the word 'marriage' has become a symbolic battle over who will possess it. And its a testament to just how radical the left/gay lobby has become in its unwillingness to even accept a semantic deception or compromise; instead they now demand the word marriage as well. Its moved beyond tolerance and past even acceptance to to point where they demand celebration of their lifestyle. Romney has stood against that, and in Mass that's probably a brave thing to do.
For him to be good on Second Amendment issues would probably be too much to ask, but then again if he ever did go onto the Senate I'd bet that the chances of him voting to confirm judges who respect a citizen's INDIVIDUAL right to own guns would be greater than the two clowns they have now who see the Second Amendment as dealing with a collective right that can be rendered worthless by crazy cities like Chicago and Washington D.C.