“First, in 2004 he signed a bill which reformed some aspects of the extremely severe and arbitrary gun-licensing system in Massachusetts. This would be an impressive accomplishment if that were all the bill did. But the bill also made the Massachusetts ban on “assault weapons” permanent. (The previous ban was parasitic on the federal ban, which expired in September 2004.) The bill that Romney signed was a compromise bill, approved by both sides in the Massachusetts gun-control debate and widely supported by both parties in the legislature. The NRA considered the bill to be a net gain, but it’s hardly the unalloyed, pro-rights success that Romney now claims. As governor, Romney declared his support for banning so-called “assault weapons.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTMzYzZiNWMyNzYyMWRkYjIwNWU0NDEzNWJmMDU4MTk=
You mean this bill? All depends on context doesn’t it, which you obviously no very little about. This quote by the way is from an NRO article which attacks Romney on this issue.
Mitt worshipers? Give me a break ok with that crap. You lap this crap up without doing any fact checking and I have no desire to start pulling article after article on google to ascertain if these quotes are presented in context (of course you don’t question the absence of links at all do you?).
no = know