Posted on 09/26/2011 2:53:45 PM PDT by Jeff Head
I also agree that the States are the ones who primarily should deal with the issue.
For example, we do not allow felons to have firearms. I personally believe that once a felon has paid their debt, then all of his rights should be restored. In doing so, I believe murders and rapists and those terribly violent criminals should have much harsher penalties...ie. more death penalties and life imprisonments for them which would mean they would not get their right to bear arms back (if executed or kept for life).
Anyhow, I have urged Herman Cain to come out with a more definitive 2nd amendment statemnt for his web site that is as clear as some of his other statements to the press or in meetings. Same on abortion.
I believe he is strong in both cases based on his comments, but I would like to see "official" position statements on them just the same.
Herman Cain wouldn't want states to interpret/regulate the 13th~15th Amendments, so why allow Jim Crow to encroach on and infringe the 2nd?
Would Mrs. Cain agree that the 19th Amendment is dependent on which state she resides in, or that she needs a permit to exercise it?
It would be nice to see Herman Cain speak out clearly and strongly on this issue, among others.
“It’s a Right not a priviledge, and Rights shouldn’t be subject to any pre-condition no matter what state you live in or happen to be travelling through.”
Agreed. The question is how we get to there from where we are right now? I think we’re better off reclaiming our gun liberties on a state by state basis. You don’t want to put all of your eggs in one basket.
Cain flunks the gun rights test.
Although Cain says he supports the Second Amendment, in the next breath he says he fully supports any and all state gun control/prohibitions.
That is like supporting federal rights for women and blacks, but allowing women and blacks to be slaves if the state laws permit them to be slaves.
I will not support any candidate who allows, and favors, individual states to outlaw guns, or to take away womens voting rights, or to allow slavery, or to prohibit free speech, etc. .
http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/Cain/Gun-Control.php
I believe his opinion/stance is being mischaracterized by the interview. I have written his campaign and asked that they set up an issue statement on gun control to clarify his positions and make sure that what he has said at other times is clear.
In that regard, he has stated that states can pass their own conceal carry laws, felony restrictions, etc. I have not heard him say he favors states taking, limiting, or registering gun ownership. He has said when interviewed, “If a bill comes across my desk as president, that hinders American’s right to bear arms, I would veto it in a second.”
Like you, I will not support any candidate who is in favor of allowing government (at any level) to infringe on our rights as law-abiding, legal citizens to keep and bear arms.
You realize, of course, that if Cain is elected, then you can forget about National Reciprocity.
You can also forget about owning a gun in any state in the future which has a large number of Democrat voters because Cain will not interfere.
Lastly, the United States Supreme Court is just 1 judge away from determining that individual citizens are not allowed to own, possess, or carry guns.
We already have the second part of your statements going on around the country in those states. Look at Illinois and others. But even there they have not been wholly successful.
I believe Cain would appoint judges who would be strict constitutionalists according to original intent, and if he had appointments to make they would favor making the current court even more conservative and more inclined to follow the constitution and not make new laws or allow "current thinking", or other nations to sway them.
Having said all of that, I believe Cain needs to clarify his stance on the 2nd amendment and gun control and have asked him to do so. Many others should ask him to do the same.
CGalen is going to every Cain thread and posting this lie.
Herman Cain is 200% pro 2nd Amendment. What he said in the Blitzer interview (mentioned on that link you posted) was taken to mean that he believed states could overrule the 2nd amendment. He does not believe that and he explains here:
(at the 10:17 mark) I strongly support the 2nd amendment. I said that some things should be left up to the states, for example, if the states want to require background checks, let the states decide that. But I did not in ANY WAY mean states had a right to restrict access to owning firearms. So that was the misunderstanding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOUF1Hug0JI
You wrote:
“You realize, of course, that if Cain is elected, then you can forget about National Reciprocity. You can also forget about owning a gun in any state in the future which has a large number of Democrat voters because Cain will not interfere.”
In contrast stand the facts of what he actually said, in context:
BLITZER: All right. Let’s talk about gun control. Do you support any gun control?
CAIN: I support the Second Amendment.
BLITZER: So you don’t — so what’s the answer on gun control?
CAIN: The answer on gun control is I support strong — strongly support the Second Amendment. I don’t support, you know, onerous legislation that’s going to restrict people’s rights in order to be able to protect themselves as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
BLITZER: Should states or local governments be allowed to control the gun situation? Or should...
CAIN: Yes.
BLITZER: The answer is yes?
CAIN: The answer is yes. That should be a state’s decision.
You wrote:
“Although Cain says he supports the Second Amendment, in the next breath he says he *fully* supports *any and all* state gun control/prohibitions.”
In contrast stand the facts of what he actually said, in context:
BLITZER: All right. Let’s talk about gun control. Do you support any gun control?
CAIN: I support the Second Amendment.
BLITZER: So you don’t — so what’s the answer on gun control?
CAIN: The answer on gun control is I support strong — strongly support the Second Amendment. I don’t support, you know, onerous legislation that’s going to restrict people’s rights in order to be able to protect themselves as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
BLITZER: Should states or local governments be allowed to control the gun situation? Or should...
CAIN: Yes.
BLITZER: The answer is yes?
CAIN: The answer is yes. That should be a state’s decision.
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.