Skip to comments.Swann vs. Rendell on the 2nd Amendment
Posted on 10/20/2006 3:06:50 PM PDT by truthfinder9
Compare and Contrast: Swann vs. Rendell on the 2nd Amendment
Friday, October 13, 2006
For years, Ed Rendell has been a liberal anti-gun politician from Philadelphia, but at the third and final gubernatorial debate, he outdid himself. He basically told gun owners that if he gets a second term, they can expect an all out assualt on their right to bear arms. Just look at what Ed Rendell said:
"And for an ordinary citizen, one gun a month means the ordinary citiizen can buy 12 a year. How is that a possible intrusion on the rights of ordinary citizens? We need tougher gun laws."
All You Have To Do Is Look at Rendells Record to See What a Second Term Will Mean for Pennsylvanias Sportsmen
Rendell supports a proposal to limit gun ownership to One Gun a Month. Rendell has been Harrisburgs main supporter of one gun a month legislation, which would limit the number of guns that law abiding citizens can purchase. (Philadelphia Gubernatorial Debate, October 10, 2006)
Rendell supported suing gun manufacturers when he was Mayor of Philadelphia. Rendell supported suing gun manufacturers for crimes that were committed with guns, even though the manufacturers had no actual responsibility for the crimes committed. This was a liberal proposal by big city Mayors in the 1990s, and Rendell was a leader in the effort. (National Review, October 11, 2002)
Rendell once told representatives of the Violence Policy Institute that he cant say publicly what he wants to do. Rendell told members of the Violence Policy Institute, who support banning all guns, that "I just can't say publicly what we want to do we have to take these things slowly." There is no doubt he wont take things slowly if re-elected to a second term. (National Review, October 11, 2002)
Rendell has added to the crime problem by putting more criminals on the street. According to his own parole department, Rendell has paroled more criminals than ever before. The Philadelphia Inquirer actually wrote that one of the reasons crime is up is because there arent enough parole officers to deal with all of the new parolees. (Philadelphia Inquirer, February 13, 2006)
Its no wonder Democratic House Minority Leader Bill Deweese said this about Rendell:
"Ed Rendell is a big-city politician who believes your guns, not criminals, are the problem." (National Review, October 11, 2002)
But does Rendell support only one beating per demonstration?
I forbid you from reading more than one book a month.
Or printing one newsletter per month.
6 newsletters a year...bi-monthly.
It means bankruptcy. I have been on the one-handgun-per-month "diet" for three months now. I'm not going to be able to keep this up.
"Fortunately", Kalifornia has omitted so many fine guns from their "not unsafe" list that I will soon run out of guns that I wish to own. Maybe I need more than one of each ... maybe more than two ...
Lynn Swann is the opposite of the sleazy, leftist socialist revolutionary Democrat, Rendell. When will the people of Pennsylvania wake up and start placing honest, intelligent people into office? Swann is a person of grace, dignity, intelligence, and class. He is what the people of the State of Pennsylvania need for governor. But who will the people choose?
Fewer guns per month, restricted to smaller calibers, reducing the length of handgun barrel or increasing the length of the rifle barrel you are allowed to buy, reducing the velocity of the ammunition you can buy, etc. There is little end to the creative ways an enemy of freedom can slice off bits of your rights. However, never do they provide scientific evidence that the net effect is greater safety to you. In fact, that is not the intent so the idea of basing these proposed rules on hard evidence of effectiveness doesn't concern them.
For me, devoted to preserving history, the one-gun-per-month law puts up another obstacle to preserving a collection. When a veteran passes away, his widow will take the 2-3 guns he brought back as war souvenirs and throw them away or take them to the police dept for destruction and the information they provide about battles or people from that time is lost.
When the owner of a large and often historically important collection passes away or decides it is time to sell the collection, it goes up for auction. One-gun-per-month laws make it impossible to transfer the collection intact to another collector or researcher. I run into this problem where such laws already exist. Getting govt agencies to recognize and accommodate these situations is a difficult or impossible task.
In other words, these laws don't have no established societal benefit but do make it more difficult for good people to engage in legitimate activities. When you watch the movie, "Flags of our Fathers" just remember that many of the arms you see in the film are daily being lost and destroyed because of dishonest politicians and laws that ignore and work against preserving our history. Also remember that human rights such as self-defense, which those soldiers fought for, have been mocked and trashed in recent decades. What did those soldiers accomplish?
Rendel raised the income tax rates!
It's time for a change in Harrisburg!
There is no comparison between Swann and Rendell on matters of character. Swann is by far the better man!
Vote for Swann for the next Governor of PA!
Good one, though technically I believe it's several.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.