NRA now eyeing role in GOP Primaries

The National Rifle Association, which did not endorse President Bush in 2000 and 2004 until just a month before the general election, is considering stepping into the presidential campaign fray early next year during the primary season, the group's chief lobbyist says.

"Historically, we have not gotten involved in primaries. We traditionally wait until after the conventions," said Chris Cox, head lobbyist for the NRA. "That being said, given the candidates and the process and the front-loading of the primaries, it is a possibility that we could get involved in one of these presidential primaries."

Republican presidential hopefuls know of the 4-million-member group's power. On Friday, they paraded before 500 lifetime NRA members at a conference in Washington, each making a pitch for why they are the best candidate to protect the rights of gun owners. Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, who earned an "A" rating from the NRA during his time in the Senate, was the group's favorite. Meanwhile, the GOP front-runner, Rudolph W. Giuliani, left members underwhelmed.

It sure scares me.

In this Feb 2000 interview on Meet the Press, Rudy said, "...a person who wants to possess a handgun should pass a written test, should be able to pass a physical test in the actual use of the gun, and should have to demonstrate good moral character and a reason to have the gun. That those should be...essentially there should be a uniform law passed by Congress that says that every state has to administer that...."

He went on to say, "...and I've been arguing for that since at least 1980."

My questions are, why should I have to show a reason to have my handguns, or to buy more of them, and where does the Congress get the power to pass such a law?

I think the whole notion that I should have to show a reason for buying a handgun inverts the natural relationship of a citizen and his government. The government should have to show a reason why I should NOT buy a handgun, rather than requiring me to show a reason why I should. A person who holds the opposite conviction just has a fundamentally different view of government from mine, and I can't support that view.

I’m so glad I live in Texas. Of course a person can have a handgun in their home but this past September, a law became effective that you can now carry a handgun in your car.

So, why would anyone need a “Concealed Handgun Permit”?

"So, why would anyone need a “Concealed Handgun Permit”?"

You not always in your vehicle or home. You could be escorting a family member down the street.

Also keep in mind the "use it or loose it" theory. If the majority of Texans (or any State that has carry licenses) get and maintain the carry license, it is like a vote. If low number take advantage of their rights, that also is like a vote. High participation in the program helps secure your rights on several levels.

True. I guess my mind-set was to protect my family from home invasions and protect myself from being carjacked by some crack head..........or liberal. Wait, that’s one and the same. Never mind.

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.