Posted on 10/26/2007 4:09:37 PM PDT by Spiff
“How do you feel about Mitt embracing the AWB (assault weapons ban)? If you believe in the Second Amendment then you cannot possibly support this man.”
I believe in the Second Amendment and so does Mitt Romney.
LLS
Gosh. You're pretty careless about who you join your credibility to on such an important matter of God-given unalienable rights.
Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban
“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
- Mitt Romney, July 08, 2004
Romney admitted that he supports a federal “assault” weapons ban in one of the recent presidential debates. Heard him say it with my own ears.
“BTW, you are the fifth person in two days that has used that talking point... verbatim.”
Well, look at it this way.
You are right about Dole. He was a war hero, a good man, a good politician, and except for being “tax collector for the welfare state”, generally good for conservatives.
But it’s true he ran a lousy 1996 campaign. It’s because he really wasnt the energetic, sharp-elbowed and articulate kind of gabber who could keep up with Clinton.
We’ve been running inarticulate mumblers since the days of Reagan. Bush41 and Bush43 have various syntactical ‘issues’, and Bob Dole was as dry as Kansas in July.
The Bush’s got lucky, running against 2 massachusetts boobs on the Democratic side and, well, Al Gore.
If we want to beat Hillary we will need an energetic scrapper who is willing to tell the American people what principles he stands for, why it is better than Hillary’s agenda, and whats right and whats wrong. And do it in a way that doesnt lead to foot-n-mouth disease.
From the Fred Barnes article:
As for Thompson, the focus groups of Republicans liked him “but they don’t see the passion,” Luntz says. “In the end, Republicans won’t vote for a laid back candidate.”
... If Fred shows the passion and shows he can run better than Dole, he’ll pick up support.
LLS
Maybe on election day you should to a real rodeo and let your bull do some jumping there. Leave the Republican nomination process to the voters who actually want to win.
Speaking of credibility, a few facts to add about this NRA-supported bill that Romney signed, that show that the bill he signed was *not* an assault weapons ban (Mass. had that since 1998), but a package of reforms relating to it, that were helpful to gun owners and their rights ...
http://www.nraila.org//Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=1149
“Representing the greatest set of firearm law reforms since the passage of the Commonwealth`s worst in the nation gun laws, S.2367 is a breath of fresh air for law abiding gun owners. Governor Romney is expected to sign the bill into law later this week.
While not perfect by any means, this bill represents a step forward for gun owners in Massachusetts. “
See also:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#guns
Opponents of gun control and critics of Governor Romney point to the fact that he signed firearms legislation in July, 2004 that included a ban of assault weapons in Massachusetts (S.2367). However, the bill only reaffirmed an existing Massachusetts state ban on assault weapons that was enacted as part of sweeping gun control laws passed in Massachusetts in 1998, five years before Romney took office, and didn’t ban any additional guns. The state ban of assault weapons enacted in 1998 was not due to disappear, nor would it have become invalid with the sunset of the federal ban in September, 2004.
(Massachusetts - Firearms Reform Bill Sent to the Governor`s Desk, National Rifle Association - Institute for Legislative Action, June 29, 2004)
The firearms reform bill signed by Governor Romney in 2004 had the endorsement of the NRA (a MUST READ), the Gun Owners’ Action League, law enforcement and Massachusetts gun owners. The bill added several measures these groups favored, including a lengthening of the terms of firearm identification cards and licenses to carry, namely;
1) Extending the term of a firearm identification card and a license to carry firearms from four years to six years,
2) Granting a 90-day grace period for holders of firearm identification cards and licenses to carry who have applied for renewal, and
3) Creating a seven-member Firearm License Review Board to review firearm license applications that have been denied.
“This is truly a great day for Massachusetts’ sportsmen and women. These reforms correct some serious mistakes that were made during the gun debate in 1998, when many of our state’s gun owners were stripped of their long-standing rights to own firearms.”
(MA State Senator Stephen M. Brewer (D), July 1, 2004)
“I want to congratulate everyone that has worked so hard on this issue. Because of their dedication, we are here today to sign into law this consensus piece of legislation. This change will go a long way toward fixing the flaws created by the 1998 law. Another key piece to this legislation addresses those citizens who have applied for renewals. If the government does not process their renewal in a timely fashion, those citizens won’t be put at risk because of the 90 day grace period that is being adopted today.”
(MA State Representative George N. Peterson, Jr. (R), July 1, 2004)
“There are a lot of good things in the bill,” said Jim Wallace, legislative director of the Gun Owners’ Action League, the state’s leading pro-gun group. “In all, the bill represents a healing process, or the beginning of the healing process, between lawful gun owners and the Massachusetts Legislature.”
(State moves on assault weapons ban, Boston Globe, June 24, 2004)
The AWB was passed in *1998* in Massachusetts, and not by Mitt Romney.
The NRA supported the bil that Romney signed, and here is an article correcting the record on it:
http://www.nraila.org//Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=1149
“Representing the greatest set of firearm law reforms since the passage of the Commonwealth`s worst in the nation gun laws, S.2367 is a breath of fresh air for law abiding gun owners. Governor Romney is expected to sign the bill into law later this week.
While not perfect by any means, this bill represents a step forward for gun owners in Massachusetts.”
“Myth: Some headlines claimed that the legislature voted to expand the ban on the sale of the same 19 guns that the federal government has banned.
Fact: The guns are already banned in Massachusetts . The legislature only voted to clarify the definition of so-called “assault weapons,” but made no changes to the number of guns included.
Myth: The gun ban was extended.
Fact: Our state`s gun ban was not due to disappear, nor will it become invalid if the federal ban sunsets in September.
Myth: The legislature somehow “won over” gun-rights supporters by including reforms.
Fact: NRA and Gun owners` Action League (GOAL) had made it very clear to the legislature that we would not give up any ground. NRA and GOAL supported this bill because it did not ban any guns, and because it made much-needed reforms. “
What part of that do you not understand?
rootie and mitt both are for one form of gun control or the other... The Second Amendment is far more than hunting rights ala rootie... then there is the abortion issue and rootie’s love of gay love. No, this election is about more than an Elephant winning... it is about the direction that our country is going to take for the next 50 years... I can’t sail where I want to go by using the mitt or rootie compass/gps instruments. I am not alone... I sail with an Armada of millions!
LLS
There are other rules, but that one always applies.
What part of “The AWB was passed in 1998, and this bill was a reform to *soften* the impact and *fix* things so it was better for gun owners, which the NRA supported” ... do YOU not understand?
As Governor, every gun bill he signed was NRA supported or sponsored. He supported continuing an AWB that was already in place and which in Massachusetts was not going away anyway.
The firearms reform bill signed in 2004 prohibited the sale of the same weapons in Massachusetts banned in the 1998 legislation but loosened other restrictions imposed by the 1998 gun bill. Therefore, after Governor Romney signed the gun bill in 2004, gun owners in Massachusetts had fewer restrictions on gun ownership than at any time since 1998.
Mitt Romney has said: “Americans should have the right to own and possess firearms as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. I’m proud to be among the many decent, law-abiding men and women who safely use firearms.”
Craig Sandler, former Director of General Operations of the National Rifle Association and former Nashua Police Chief, endorsed Governor Mitt Romney for President. In endorsing Governor Romney, Craig Sandler said, “Throughout his career in both the public and private sectors, Mitt Romney has demonstrated exceptional leadership ability, integrity, and commitment to principle. As a New Hampshire resident, former law enforcement officer, and avid sportsman, I am supporting Governor Romney because he is the candidate who will protect our Constitutional rights and strengthen our nation.”
The NRA myth/fact on the bill:
http://www.nraila.org//Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=1149
“Myth: Some headlines claimed that the legislature voted to expand the ban on the sale of the same 19 guns that the federal government has banned.
Fact: The guns are already banned in Massachusetts . The legislature only voted to clarify the definition of so-called “assault weapons,” but made no changes to the number of guns included.
Myth: The gun ban was extended.
Fact: Our state`s gun ban was not due to disappear, nor will it become invalid if the federal ban sunsets in September.
Myth: The legislature somehow “won over” gun-rights supporters by including reforms.
Fact: NRA and Gun owners` Action League (GOAL) had made it very clear to the legislature that we would not give up any ground. NRA and GOAL supported this bill because it did not ban any guns, and because it made much-needed reforms.
Myth: Those legislators that wanted to expand the semi-auto gun ban claimed that they “spearheaded” S.2367. “
"We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them. I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety."
Romney, in one of this year’s presidential debates, said that he supports a federal “assault” weapons ban.
Do you agree with him?
Romney on the Brady bill: “Today we don’t have the Brady bill because we have instantaneous background checks. That’s no longer a operative or needed measure.”
Sorry. Romney has a thirty-five year public record we can look at, going back to his self-admitted support for abortion-on-demand since 1970 (before Roe), when his mother ran for the Senate.
Nothing he can say now will change that record. He has no credibility. None. Neither does anyone who is now trying to empower him and his lying. All they’re doing is assuring that they will go down with him as more and more people discover the truth.
LLS
You do realize that implicit in that quote is Romney's belief that the Brady Bill was an "operative and needed measure"? Right? What a weasel this guy is. In fact, he defines weaselly.
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.