|
 |
Posted on 04/29/2012 4:52:29 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Andrew Kaczynski dug up this Romney press release today from the Web Archive, showing that he signed off on a permanent Assault Weapons ban in 2004:
In a move that will help keep the streets and neighborhoods of Massachusetts safe, Governor Mitt Romney today signed into law a permanent assault weapons ban that forever makes it harder for criminals to get their hands on these dangerous guns.
“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,” Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony with legislators, sportsmen’s groups and gun safety advocates. “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.”
Like the federal assault weapons ban, the state ban, put in place in 1998, was scheduled to expire in September. The new law ensures these deadly weapons, including AK-47s, UZIs and Mac-10 rifles, are permanently prohibited in Massachusetts no matter what happens on the federal level.
“We are pleased to mark an important victory in the fight against crime,” said Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey. “The most important job of state government is ensuring public safety. Governor Romney and I are determined to do whatever it takes to stop the flood of dangerous weapons into our cities and towns and to make Massachusetts safer for law-abiding citizens.”
(Excerpt) Read more at therightscoop.com ...
|
|
If anyone expects Romney to be any different, you are fooling yourself. Evil has taken this country and both parties have lost their souls.
Reason 4,327 that I will not vote for that &%$%^)@#*%.
LLS
Not defending Romney, I'm knocking GWB.
I won’t know if I will vote for him until I’m standing in the booth. It’s a tough call.
Don’t worry, the Marxists have assured Romney that in light of his service, they will eat him last.
I looked up the MA ban Romney signed. If you get caught in MA with a “high capacity magazine” manufactured after some specific date, the fine is $10,000 and ten years felony imprisonment. (remember this if you are going to an IDPA match there!)
Mitt now says he’s pro-gun (and always has been), so I guess we don’t need to worry about him in the White House.
He is, after all, a lifelong hunter and a gun owner.
/johnny
That is a liberal fantasy that just won't work. Do the logistics. How many cops are there? How many firearms are there?
Nope. Not gonna happen. We won't be disarmed.
Last time someone tried it, lots of folks died.
/johnny
Clinton managed it. They will try it again at some point. they will have to.
And yet, tons of idiots tell us this man is the only hope to stop Obama.
then you had better pray extra hard that we take the senate or we’re all effed double plus good and if it turns into a tie and Obama is still President, you can thank yourself for costing us control of the senate and the legislative agenda for the next 2-4 years.
Yes, and it was not always the right people who got shot, like when Dirty Harry does the shooting.
Those who want to “re-create sixty eight” will provide opportunities to “kill a commie for mommy”.
The GOP is as dangerous to liberty as the Rats.
/johnny
You own that mess.
/johnny
bookmark
But the GOP has their man and now we'll hear the endless drumbeat of standing behind this anti-gun, pro-abortion, pro- national/socialized health care, high tax, pro-gay marriage, anti Iraq war “conservative.” Uninspiring, he's the lukewarm answer the media liked better and who paid his dues within a party as well as had the financial resources to simply win by attrition and mass, not through ideas or consistency on issues. Now this old potato will get warmed up a little by a political machine and go against Obama who will crush him in Nov.
The candidates that would have been most dangerous for Obama would have been those that would have rallied the base, had a consistent conservative track record and brought forth new ideas. It seems that those who sit best in reality with the conservative voter are not those that make it through a media and GOP process that selects their “moderate middle of the road” guy.
2012 is over before it even started.
This is a rehash of previous anti-Romney verbiage. Nothing new here.
For those who are still having hissy fits over this, answer two questions for me: Since when is a military weapon (other than collector’s pieces) needed for home or recreational use? And, a. do you really want 4 more years of Obama?; b. if not, there is only one other realistic choice: Romney. These are the facts. Deal with it.
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.