Replies

So if he is saying he will be NRA friendly, then will be.

Saying he will sign an AWB bill is not friendly.

He needs to convince us that he "shall not infringe".

He is a Harvard lawyer. I think he's read the Second a couple of times.

If he wants to receive the warm support of gunowners, he needs to do this. We can overlook his signing of the MA AWB and recognize that he extracted some gun rights from an 80% Dim legislature. The NRA recognizes this. But we don't like it. And he is running for national office.

"Shall not infringe" is a lot more important than whether he has ever gone hunting. I will be very suspicious of him if he pulls a Kerry camo hunting expedition but maintains his current stance on assault weapons.

We have never fully trusted Bush II on the AWB issue. We voted for him, knowing we had a GOP congress to quell any gungrabbing. And they did. They also extended legal protection to our gun manufacturers. While we might be concerned that Bush would sign a Dim AWB bill now, doing so would probably cause him to leave office with approval ratings under 10%. And many GOP congresscritters would back away from him like he was radioactive, just out of fear of the voters.

The time of scared soccer moms has passed. The era of CCW has dawned. Romney needs to follow the will of the people, as expressed in their states. He needs to respect that and affirm it. He doesn't even have to run from his record as a governor of a very liberal state but he needs to be a lot more specific and convincing on the gun issue if he expects to receive warm support from RKBA folk. Otherwise, we cannot really trust him fully with a Dim-majority congress.

Well, I see his dilemna. If pledges to support the NRA agenda 100%, then he will be seen as insincere, and if he maintains his stance then he will be seen as not good enough. It’s crazy, but he can’t win either way, because his conservatives have lambasted him for changing his position.