Really?
I didn’t think this was NRA’s MO: An Iowan who sits on the NRA’s board of directors says the gun rights group may endorse a presidential candidate before Iowa’s Caucuses.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 9th, 2007 at 9:44 am
Ron Paul is the most pro-gun candidate, but I think he offended the NRA when he considered a bill they supported as unconstitutional…like they’ve done recently in collaboration with the leftists in Congress. Ron Paul supports disbanding the BATF and considers ALL Federal gun laws for citizens unconstituional…the Constitutionalist position. (Gun laws for federal agents while they are on the job for us…should be permissable)
Among the so-called “top-tier”, I would say Fred Thompson is the next best candidate for support of the 2nd Amendment. Does anyone know…did Thompson oppose the AWB?? …a no-brainer IF one supports the wording of the 2nd Amendment!!
October 9th, 2007 at 9:51 am
I believe I’ll say something to the NRA reps at the GBR about this.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:02 am
If they endorse someone this early and it doesn’t happen to be Ron Paul, I will immediately end my membership and convince the many, many gun owners and competition shooters to do the same. The only other person with a decent gun record is the Huckster, but Paul raised 5x more money than he did, and the same amount as McCain. He has the 3rd largest amount of cash on hand right now, and he would be second if Romney didn’t keep giving himself money.
This would really be the last straw – so much money and 4 million members and not one damn law that helps restore our rights in like 40 years. I want to see progress, not defense.
October 9th, 2007 at 11:26 am
HardCorps,
I agree. There’s probably some hardline 2nd Amendment people in the NRA (and I’ve been a member), but now I’m with Gunowners of America which Rep. Ron Paul called, “the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washingotn D.C.”
Clearly Ron Paul is the most pro 2nd Amendment Presidential candidate according to his voting record and he supports the repeal of all Federal gun laws.
October 9th, 2007 at 11:49 am
If they are going to endorse anyone it’s going to be Richardson. Don’t expect them to endorse any Republican in the primary. I wouldn’t give too much credence to this. The decision to endorse or not endorse a candidate doesn’t sit with The Board of Directors. That decision will be made by ILA.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Richardson??!!
I think he even supports the semi-auto weapons ban.
Ron Paul is certainly best re: 2nd Amendment rights; followed by Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Fred Thompson and now, Alan Keyes (probably all about the same). Alan Keyes has written on the 2nd Amendment in a way that would probably be nearest or with Ron Paul.
All the other Democrats are bascially in league with Communists and Nazis on gun control, especailly…
…Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama who already have protection by the SS with the full-auto weapons they carry EVERYWHERE, but they want the same hired guns to take away our guns (except for the hunting guns they will LET us keep) and not let us carry them ANYWHERE…arrogant elitist tyrants who are UNFIT to be the public SERVANTS of a free people!!
October 9th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Richardson probably counts as a switcher. He voted for the Assault Weapon ban, but he’s got a CCW and voted against reviving the AWB when it was sunsetting. He’s largely been trying to paint his support for the AWB as support for the other parts of the bill (because being against the right to assembly is apparently more popular?). I wouldn’t expect him to do much one way or the other in office: he’s no Hillary Clinton, Edwards, or Biden, but not far on our side either.
As to Ron Paul, since someone brought out his quote on the GOA, I’m duty bound to point out that he voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms act.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Kevin,
You might mention it at GBR, but keep a few things in context. First of all, Kayne does not work with ILA. He’s in General Operations. If anything, I’m more hesitant over the fact that NRA is allowing him to make ILA/PVF statements to the press.
Of course, they may not be formally allowing him. He’s the same guy who, very stupidly, forced Bush to back away from NRA in 2000 when he said “that if Republican nominee George W. Bush wins in November, ‘we’ll have . . . a president where we work out of their office.'”
Given that, there is reason to doubt him as a political spokesperson. I’m not saying there haven’t been conversations, but he’s not exactly the guy you look to for statements on political moves.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
gattsuru wrote,
“As to Ron Paul, since someone brought out his quote on the GOA, I’m duty bound to point out that he voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms act.”
Yes, and thanks; that’s the bill I alluded to in my first comment, though I couldn’t specifically remember it. Paul considered it unconstitutional for reasons other than gun rights, but otherwise fully supports the 2nd Amendment by opposing all Federal gun laws against any infringement on the right of citizens to keep an bear arms–including disbanding the BATF. The best we can do for gun rights and ALL of our rights, is to have principled Constitutionalists as President and in all areas of government.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Well, the poison pills on the bill either involved mandatory gun locks with sales, which I can’t see as unconstitutional (there is no requirement for use of locks, and even considered as a tax they’re laughable compared to Pittman-Robertson), or thinking that Congress can’t prohibit a type of court case, which is pretty laughable given that Congress kinda defines what laws the courts can rule up to and including removing common law definitions.
October 9th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
Yep, one could argue for overlooking small things in a bill, but I’d rather have a Constitutionalist overseeing my gun rights. Although the NRA supported that one, they have recently rolled over into bed with Congressional anti-gun leftists to greatly expand the Brady Bill which passed the House on a “yea” voice vote with no recorded votes. I’m sure Congressman Paul said “NO”.
I’d rather have them working to REPEAL gun laws and eliminate the BATF…put’em (BATF agents) on the border instead where could do us some good to “protect the States against invasion” according to the Constitutional (Article IV, Section 4) mandate for the United States government.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
[…] when Uncle highlighted it noting that it’s not their typical election year action, and Kevin Baker said he’d be […]
October 9th, 2007 at 11:37 pm
Richardson voted against the AWB, but as majority whip he went around trying to get other people to vote for it because that was his job.
October 9th, 2007 at 11:43 pm
Ooops… that was wrong. He did vote for the ban in 1994, but he also voted to repeal it in 1996