Mitt Romney And The Second Amendment

lonestartimes ^ | 2/25/2008

[tacticalogic]

Unfortunately he signed a bill that raised the fees

Why did he do that?

[tacticalogic]

Unfortunately he signed a bill that raised the fees

Why did he do that?

[Leisler]

Oh, yeah?

[Leisler]

Oh, yeah?

[Dead Corpse]

If you aren't aiming for Gold Star Carry status, you aren't our friend no matter what other platitudes you mouth. Same goes for support of ugly weapons bans, midnight special bans, and "gun show loophole" canards.

Yes, this issue is just that important.

[greyfoxx39]

And I think he doesn't want to spend anymore time at a Harvard Alumni event than at a VFW - he'd much rather just be with his wife or family doing a Mormon Family Home Evening and eating jello.

(BARF) How superior!

[SoConPubbie]

Here is the operative part of Romney's answer, the one that governs what he will do as President:

Once again, the Mitt-botts seem to think we need them to parse what Mitt has said in order to understand what Mitt has said.

And in this case, Mitt seems to be both supporting the 2nd amendment and attacking the 2nd amendment on one statement.

This gives a whole new meaning to the phrase flip-flop!

What part of the following do you and Mitt NOT understand:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

[Domandred]

Here is a youtube link for your quote btw:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSGySNLyACE

[ExSoldier]

I’m a life long 2nd Amendment supporter and I’m not a member of the NRA. Neither is my father, his brothers, or any other of my family.

Why not? I got my first junior membership when I was five and saved up for a life membership while still in high school. Then I became a certified instructor for them about 20 years ago. Yeah, sometimes they do things that make me mad. I knew the UN was after our guns years before they acknowledged this sad fact. But you know, without them we'd have lost all our rights and our guns in the 1960's or the 70's or the 80's....

Sure there are lots of gun rights groups but the best known with the most clout and the biggest and baddest organization is still the NRA! Right after the 2000 election, when I heard Bill Clinton say on cnn that the NRA was the reason they'd lost the Congress in '94 and the reason Gore lost in 2000, I knew working and saving for that life membership all those years ago had been a good thing.

Not only am I a life member and an instructor I try and give till it hurts to either the ILA or the PVF and those aren't tax deductible! Membership is like voting: It's the very least you can do to protect the 2nd Amendment. But you should go much further. Give $$$. Better yet, recruit new members. Because anybody who sits on the sidelines in this fight is gettin' the blame if we lose.

[fortheDeclaration]

You do know that as President Mitt would sign every piece of excrement anti-gun bill that made it to his desk, don’t you?

First, no bills should reach his desk.

Second, if he wanted to run for a second term, he wouldn't sign any.

Third, his statement that he believed the 2nd Amendment was an individual right was about as strong as one can make.

[Leisler]

Not a very well educated guy about the 2nd or enumerated rights in general.

Very smug though.

[Amendment10]

During the debate last night, Mitt Romney was asked about his support of Brady and a ban on assault weapons.

MR. ROMNEY: I do support the Second Amendment, and I believe that this is an individual right of citizens and not a right of government. And I hope the Supreme Court reaches that same conclusion.

For anybody who missed this from earlier 2nd A. related posts, John Bingham, the main author of Sec. 1 of the 14th A., included the 2nd A. when he read the first eight amendments as examples of constitutional statutes containing privileges and immunities that the 14th A. made mandatory for the states to respect. So there is no doubt in my mind that the 2nd A. now protects the personal right to keep and bear arms from the states as well as the feds as much as any other constitutional privilege and immunity protects other personal rights. See the 2nd A. in the middle column of the following page in the Congressional Globe, a precursor to the Congressional Record.

http://tinyurl.com/y3ne4n

In USSC cases, and court cases in general, that test the 2nd A., given that the USSC doesn't agree with 14th A. constitutional lawmakers about the scope and personal protection aspect of the 2nd A., consider that what such cases are actually testing is how corrupt the USSC is.

[fortheDeclaration]

The Huckster, like any populist nanny-stater, will sign national gun control legislation if it reaches his desk. At least Romney is up front about it. All of these candidates will. The Huskster, Flip-flop Mitt, McKeating and Julieannie. Lord help us. The Huckster scares me most. The republican party is simply liberal-lite and running full tilt to re-achieve it’s 70’s minority status.

Doom and gloom!

Look at who the Democrats are running against us-again, the Clintons.

They cannot be allowed to get in the White House.

For so many on these thread always talking about the troops, what will that do their morale to have the Clintons back in office?

If you can't vote because you 'love' the candidate, vote for the benefit of the troops!

Any GOP candidate is better then any Democrat when it comes to supporting our troops.

[fortheDeclaration]

If the SC rules that the 2A is a collective right you’re darned tootin’ it’s going to matter who’s president.

If they do that it shows that they can't read clear English!

[Gilbo_3]

The 1994 ban did not take any guns away, it just stopped you from buying new ones. If you wanted a gun, you just had to buy it before the bill took effect.

Slow down Chuck, if you spin that sh!t any faster you'll need a grease fitting...

[GingisK]

I am adamantly opposed to any restrictions...

Whew! OK, I'll put my safty back on. ;-D

[Dead Corpse]

Grease fitting? ROTFLMAO... ;-)

[fortheDeclaration]

They are quite reluctant to fight against the SAME things done by RINO's in office.

I don't see that at all.

I saw that they tried to get a amnesty bill passed and that was stopped.

We can make anti-gun congressmen pay at the polls and reject the NRA's excuses for their compromises.

[fortheDeclaration]

The ONLY way Mitt will get my vote is if he loudly and clearly PROMISES to VETO any new gun control legislation that comes across his desk. Otherwise....it's a no sale, because it's that important.

No sitting GOP president is going to sign anti-gun legislation if he wants a second term.

[fortheDeclaration]

WHERE did he make that promise? Certainly not in his debate statement last night. He was very careful NOT to make that specific promise. As stated here many times by myself and other true 2nd Amendment supporters, that is the ONLY thing that matters. An equivocal statement like he made last night assuages no one's fears except those to whom the 2nd is but a passing interest.

As the campaign continues and moves South, I am sure the issue will be more clarified and he will be asked to make such a commitment.