@repjustinamash: pandering when he wants your vote. Otherwise, forget gun owners
Justin Amash said he’d support national concealed carry reciprocity when running. Now, he’s voting and advocating the other way.
For you twitterers, shame him.
7 Responses to “@repjustinamash: pandering when he wants your vote. Otherwise, forget gun owners”
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)
November 16th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
Or as Justin puts it on Facebook:
Justin Amash
It’s remarkably bold of the National Rifle Association to send out false and misleading messages regarding HR 822, an unconstitutional bill that improperly applies the Commerce Clause to concealed carry licensing. I would support legislation that gets the federal government out of the way of states that want to recognize other states’ concealed carry permits. In contrast, H R 822 will hurt gun rights by conceding broad new authority to the federal government to override state sovereignty.
Gun rights advocates have fought hard to prevent liberal abuse of the Commerce Clause that would restrict gun rights. As an Endowment Life Member of the NRA and a Representative of individuals who believe deeply in the right to keep and bear arms, I am disappointed that the NRA has decided to put its own interests ahead of the interests of gun owners. Fortunately, many other gun rights groups rightly oppose HR 822.
November 16th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
He’s a douchebag.
November 16th, 2011 at 6:24 pm
Ah. He’s fallen for NAGR propaganda. And still breaking a promise.
November 16th, 2011 at 7:36 pm
I think he makes a valid point. But it could be pretense/excuse for something he wasn’t planning on voting for anyways. I don’t know his voting history however.
November 16th, 2011 at 9:58 pm
Valid point my ass.
Only the full retard wookie-suiters are bitching about states’ rights to that extent.
That was killed by the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments.
If some state tries to trample an enumerated right, those amendments gives the federal government the duty to correct it.
Apparently Justin Amash wants to side with slaveholders, and let states decide what basic human rights we get.
November 16th, 2011 at 10:39 pm
Amash doesn’t have much of a voting history. He’s 31 years old and this is his first term. Before that he held a state rep office for two years and I don’t recall a whole lot (if any) gun issues coming up in MI at the time.
The interstate commerce language is important to have in there. That was why the Lopez case was decided against the government. They didn’t have such language in that bill and had to re-do it. The SCOTUS would have to find it Constitutional via the 14th, I think, if it were challenged without that language in there, and that might be a long shot. Better off just trying to take the short and easy route to fend off court challenges, even if I don’t agree that the commerce clause should be used in such a manner.
November 17th, 2011 at 6:56 pm
Justin: This is exactly the sort of thing Article 4, Section 1 was penned for, not the abused commerce clause.