pro gun political question

[striker55]

Who are we voting for, who is pro gun? Presidential that is.

[seamusTX]

Whoever the Libertarian Party candidate is.

I think Mr. McCain has a better record with the NRA, and he will likely have some conservative Republicans tugging on his sleeve and telling him not to poison the well for them. (Senators and congressmen have much longer careers than presidents.)

- Jim

[Venus Pax]

Ron Paul is probably the most pro-gun candidate still in the race. He is rarely mentioned by the media.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com

[Frost]

Ron Paul is probably the most pro-gun candidate still in the race. He is rarely mentioned by the media.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com

While technically he is still "in the race" McCain has the nomination now, lets hope the revolution continues and does some good in the republican party. Barring an independent billionaire jumping in we have Obama/Clinton or McCain to consider for president.

[striker55]

I googled all 3, McCain, Obama and Clinton and it seams McCain and Obama both have flip flopped on gun rights. What I've read they originally were for gun control but now have changed their minds. Of the three I think Clinton is the worst candidate as far as gun control goes.

[dukesean]

Reading Obama's factsheet from his website (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/addit ... rtsmen.pdf) you get the following language:

"He [Obama] will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting"

I don't like reading statements like these that have caveats. Makes their stance sound fishy.

[seamusTX]

There's nothing fishy about it. This is just doubletalk that some political consultant wrote.

Sens. Clinton and Obama never saw a gun ban they didn't vote for. The thought of people walking around in public with handguns would make them shudder, and the thought of actually using one would make them faint.

- Jim

[lrb111]

GOA presents Obama's other face here. http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/obama.htm

The concealed carry of firearms is another important issue for gun owners, and yet Obama is not only opposed to citizens carrying guns, he supports using federal laws to override those states which currently allow the practice.

[Frost]

Also keep in mind that the supreme court will be ruling on the 2nd amendment in the near future. The decision, its broadness and the reaction of the candidates could change everything about the debate this election season.

[thejtrain]

Ron Paul is probably the most pro-gun candidate still in the race. He is rarely mentioned by the media.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com

Yep - I and 69,932 other Texans voted for him. Too bad he ended up with less in his home state (5%) than in some other states (10% in Iowa, where he won a county outright). Fortunately, he also appears to have handily won the primary for his House seat (which, in a rare turn of events, was being strongly threatened by another Republican).

While technically he is still "in the race" McCain has the nomination now, lets hope the revolution continues and does some good in the republican party.

That's why those of us who are fans (but realistic enough to have realized from the get-go that he wouldn't win the nomination) have been so pleased that he's stayed in the race to the end. Just him being in the mix and saying what he's got to say exerts some pull to the right on the overall debate over the issues. Much like the 2003 governor race in California (when Gray Davis got recalled & the Governator got elected) - state senator Tom McClintock held much more conservative/Republican stances on the issues than Schwarzenegger (also GOP) did, and though the self-fulfilling prophecy of "only Arnold has a chance to win" came true, the fact that McClintock stayed in to the end (rather than "concede" early) kept Arnold from hedging left in that most left-leaning of states.

JT

[aardwolf]

Who are we voting for, who is pro gun? Presidential that is.

None of the three Democrats (Clinton, McCain, Obama) are pro gun.

[sceneshopninja]

None of the three Democrats (Clinton, McCain, Obama) are pro gun.

I see what you did there.

Obama's home state (IL) not only denies the right to carry concealed, but has some horrible restrictions on even obtaining a firearm or ammo.
Illinois Firearms FAQ: http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

Maybe Ron Paul will break off and run as an independent.

[thejtrain]

GOA presents Obama's other face here. http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/obama.htm

The concealed carry of firearms is another important issue for gun owners, and yet Obama is not only opposed to citizens carrying guns, he supports using federal laws to override those states which currently allow the practice.

Finally found a transcript of the article (but it isn't the official Chicago Tribune archive), and here's the relevant part:

{Obama] backed federal legislation that would ban citizens from carrying weapons, except for law enforcement. He cited Texas as an example of a place where a law allowing people to carry weapons has "malfunctioned" because hundreds of people granted licenses had prior convictions.

"National legislation will prevent other states' flawed concealed-weapons laws from threatening the safety of Illinois residents," Obama said.

Two questions:
1) How the hell does Texas allowing CCW endanger the safety of people living in Illinois? Does he think people who get CHLs are too stupid to realize that they're only good in that state and whatever state, by law, recognizes it through reciprocity? Absolutely ridiculous.

2) I wonder if he's got hard data on the "hundreds" of people who were granted licenses who had prior convictions. Further, I wonder if he knows what those convictions were for (i.e., if they were convictions that, by law, didn't preclude a CHL, then they shouldn't matter, should they?)? Further, I wonder if he has any hard data about the conviction rates for CHL holders vs. the population at large? Like, I don't know, here or here. Methinks the answer to all of those are "nay, good sir."

JT

[shootthesheet]

McCain is the better of the current three electable candidates. Two things to consider is that that President may nominate SCOTUS judge/s. McCain has sworn he will nominate an uncertain moderate like Bush did (I will think that until they prove me wrong). The other is that he/she will be totally in the debt of those groups that put them in office. McCain will either follow a mostly conservative line and help 2A rights or he will be wishing he was as popular as Bush is now. He MUST be watched and we cannot let our foot off his neck and allow him to get with his liberal friends and start the whole "crossing the isle" which means Americans losing rights and privileges. Either of the Dems will do everything in their power to crush not only our rights but also the organizations that we have built to be our voice. They will ensure prices of guns and ammo go up several hundred percent so that even if we have guns we cannot afford to shoot them and that there will be no new gun owners. It is their strategy of making gun ownership so expensive and hassled that they do away with us over time. There is no doubt of what a Dem president will do to rejuvenate the anti-2A rights movement.

As importantly, we must do all we can to put Conservatives into Congress. That may mean donating to out of state candidates. It may mean some people that have done nothing but complain about losing their firearm related rights to actually get off their complacency and donate time and money. That could be as simple as making sure every person they are close to is a NRA and TSRA member.

Congress makes law and the President signs them. Without both, neither side has movement. Well, unless we consider McCains love of giving the Liberals everything they want while telling us to shut up and live with it.

I do not like McCain and may not vote for him. However, we may have a chance to control him. We cannot control either of the Liberal Dems running.

[txmatt]

Two questions:
1) How the heck does Texas allowing CCW endanger the safety of people living in Illinois? Does he think people who get CHLs are too stupid to realize that they're only good in that state and whatever state, by law, recognizes it through reciprocity? Absolutely ridiculous.

JT

I think that quote was in reference to legislation (supported by if not sponsored by Ron Paul) that would require states to recognize CCW permits issued by other states, as I believe they should under the full faith and credit clause. I don't think it is ridiculous for a person to expect that, in principle, other states should, by our constitution, recognize a CCW permit issued by another state.