1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Romney Supports Ban on Weapons of 'Extraordin

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Joe Potosky, Dec 17, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Joe Potosky

    Joe Potosky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,484
    Romney Supports Ban on Weapons of 'Extraordinary Lethality'

    By Susan Jones
    CNSNews.com Senior Editor
    December 17, 2007

    (CNSNews.com) - Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney was asked about his "retreat" on gun control Sunday, just one of the issues raised in his appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press."

    Host Tim Russert asked Romney about his earlier support for strong gun control laws, noting that in his 1994 Senate race againt Ted Kennedy, Romney backed two gun-control measures -- the Brady Bill with its waiting period on gun sales; and the renewal of a 1994 ban on "assault" weapons.

    At the time, Romney said he didn't "line up with the NRA." But when he decided to run for president, Romney signed up for a lifetime membership in the National Rifle Association.

    Romney on Sunday admitted that he did support the assault weapon ban. But he hedged on whether he's still for it: "Let me describe it," he said to Russert, as Russert pressed him to say whether he still supports the assault weapons ban.

    "I would have supported the original assault weapon ban," Romney said. "I signed an assault weapon ban as Massachusetts governor because it provided for a relaxation of licensing requirements for gun owners in Massachusetts, which was a big plus. And so both the pro-gun and the anti-gun lobby came together with a bill, and I signed that.

    "And if there is determined to be, from time to time, a weapon of such lethality that it poses a grave risk to our law enforcement personnel, that's something I would consider signing. There's nothing of that nature that's being proposed today in Washington." But Romney said he "would look at weapons that pose extraordinary lethality."

    Russert tried again: "So the assault ban that expired...because Congress didn't act on it, you would support?"

    Romney noted that President Bush said he would have signed the bill if it came to his desk -- "and so would I."

    In the next breath, Romney said he was "pleased to have the support of the NRA when I ran for governor. I sought it, I seek it now. I'd love to have their support. I believe in the right of Americans to bear arms."

    Romney said he supports background checks on gun buyers "to make sure that the crazies don't buy guns." But he said with today's technology, there's no need for long waiting periods.

    "But my position is we should check on the backgrounds of people who are trying to purchase guns. We also should keep weapons of unusual lethality from being on the street. And finally, we should go after people who use guns in the commission of crimes or illegally, but we should not interfere with the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns either for their own personal protection or hunting or any other lawful purpose."
     
  2. shadow

    shadow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,445
    Describe "unusual lethality" Govenor. I always figured that DEAD was permanent, no matter how it happened. No matter if it was a .22 short or an A-Bomb.
     
  3. grammie

    grammie TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    658
    I do beleive the definition of "unusual lethality" will cover every deer caliber ever made and then some!!!!

    I heard one proposal from some female legislator,,,that any weapon with a range over 100yds should be banned!!!! Thats One Hundred Yards (100)!!!

    AKA Grammie...........
     
  4. Phil E

    Phil E TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    390
    Anybody else noticing a flagrant misuse of the "w" word here? Phil E
     
  5. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Romney was, is, and always will be a gun prohibitionist. If he wins the Republican nomination, I will vote third party. Ditto for any other anti-gun RINO. They do not deserve my vote. It's a real shame that my fellow Republicans did not vote these people out of office years ago. The GOP *MUST* weed out the RINOs in the ranks, or the party is doomed.
     
  6. J.Woolsey

    J.Woolsey Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    930
    I agree whole heartedly Brian. J.Woolsey
     
  7. g7777777

    g7777777 TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,353
    Romney may or may not be the best choice

    He may or may not be electable

    But whoever you back has to be electable or your vote is wasted-- so pick the best of that group

    and let me give you a clue- it isnt any of the democrats

    regards from Iowa

    Gene
     
  8. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    ANY vote for a third party is a vote for the Democrats.....Remember George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ross Perot. Bet those who voted Perot after what we got in Willy, may wish they had thought it through before. Sad, but this is the result of a third party in the next election as well as a Repub that has no balls to go after Hilly.
     
  9. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,639
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    The sheep will firmly support the 2 party system...............we are sooooo screwed!

    Both parties consist of the "governing class". They are above us common people, and they know what's good for us. Just ask them.

    HM
     
  10. Eleanor

    Eleanor TS Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    50
    Romney, a talking head.

    A socialist liberal in a republican suit.
     
  11. 1atatime

    1atatime TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    108
    I agree with Gene and Big Dog, and specifically with the Ross Perot analysis. If you vote for an unelectable candidate - which, frankly is ANY third party candidate - you are ceding your vote to the side most opposed to what you profess to believe.

    Perot siphoned off the "disaffected Republicans", with the net effect that we ended up with President Clinton. It was only because Republicans were able to claim the House and Senate that oppressive gun control legislation was not passed. If a Democrat is elected President next fall, it is going to be a long cold winter for gun advocates because Dems will then control the legislative and executive branches. Expect the worst for gun owners under that scenario.

    Even if we have an "anti gun" Republican as President, (examples: Guiliani or Romney) he will be somewhat controlled by party policy, tradition and counsel. Conversely, even if we have a "pro gun" Democrat as President (actually, no such animal), we're at risk due to Democrats tradition, policy and counsel.
     
  12. Gary Waalkes

    Gary Waalkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,398
    Ronald Reagan was quite nearly killed with a .22 - his press secretary was paralized, we all know that name. Two others were wounded. This is from a single shooter, at close range, and all those agents couldn't put humpty together again. No one was killed but I would still call it pretty damn leathal.

    Cannot trust Romney or McCain when it comes to supporting gun owners. Neither of them would veto an anti gun bill. You might be better off with with someone who said they did not like guns. At least that is an honest point of view and you know what you are getting. Romney, McCain and others are two faced liars when talking about supporting gun owners. What other positions are they lying about?
     
  13. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    The GOP has a cancer. And this cancer is anti-gun RINOs.

    Many of us believe it must be excised regardless of the cost, because the alternative is to see them in bed with anti-gun liberals, stripping our rights away. We've put up with this for over two decades now, and it's getting worse.

    The word for this is political blackmail. It's the only thing left to us since we are clearly not being heard by the RNC.

    If you don't like it, then don't give the nomination to someone who is repugnant to us. If you do, don't blame us when they lose. Blame yourselves.

    The primaries are coming up. How many of us vote depends on how the rest of you vote.

    Vote wisely.
     
  14. Hardy

    Hardy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8
    Romney is an honest man and told you just how he feels and will live by what he says.Read the article again.He will get my vote because I think he is the best choice for president.I think he is an honest,decent American.The Dems. are keeping their mouths shut about gun issues because they think it cost them the last election.Make no mistake,if they get in you will see some drastic changes in the gun laws...Hardy
     
  15. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Some guns are now banned with our support. Few on this site would support me having a 50 cal. full automatic gun mounted on my Explorer. Few would support my right to own a gun that fires explosive devices or shoots pathogenic agents. We now have a line drawn between legal and illegal guns. In the past, we could depend on reasonable men to make reasonable decisions about the legality of personal ownership of a specific type of gun. We now face a severe shortage of reasonable men.

    Pat Ireland
     
  16. Black Rifle

    Black Rifle TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Messages:
    100
    "Few on this site would support me having a 50 cal. full automatic gun mounted on my Explorer."

    Wouldn't bother me at all Pat, except I'd be extremely envious!

    "Few would support my right to own a gun that fires explosive devices..."

    I think we might be stretching the Founders idea of a militia weapon here, but I think I could live with the People owning said weaponry. Heck, I wouldn't care if you had a 105mm Howitzer in your back yard; as long as you let me come over to play once in a while.

    "...or shoots pathogenic agents."

    I think we can agree on this one, at least as far as the projectile is concerned.
     
  17. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    All of you "purists" who will not vote for a Republican because you think he is too soft on gun control will see just how well the Democrat winner will treat you when you insure his/her victory. Your wasted votes or your abstaining from voting will only assure that Hillary or Obama will be our next President. Then when they appouint another Ruth Bader Ginsberg to the Supreme Court, who will you cry to? Don't do yourself more harm than good.

    As a gun owner, ANY Republican is better than ANY Democrat except perhaps Richardson, but he has no chance.
     
  18. GrubbyJack

    GrubbyJack Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    527
    Pat, you might want remember Jim Zumbo and his rant on the black rifle…sounds like your in the same boat.. Just remember, UNITED WE STAND, divided we fall…..you take my black rifle, I’ll dam sure vote to outlaw your trap gun….GRUBBY
     
  19. Easystreet

    Easystreet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,462
    The Ross Perot analysis was a good example of wasting your vote and putting the party (Democrat) in power that you most wanted NOT to be in power. While I wasn't particularly happy with Bush senior, he would have been a hell of a lot better for gun owners than Clinton.

    Another example of poor judgement was when the Republicans nominated Barry Goldwater as their presidential candidate back in 1964 instead of the more moderate Nelson Rockefeller. Although I agreed more with Goldwater than I did with Rockefeller, Goldwater was perceived as an extremist by many voters and lost in a landslide to the liberal Lyndon Johnson.

    Yep, if you want to put a Democrat in office, just vote for the third party candidate or put an extreme right-winger (like Huckabee or Ron Paul) on the Republican ticket. That will put the Democrat in office for sure.

    Once more, here is the winning strategy. Put a moderate Republican in the White House and conservative senators and congressmen in the Senate and House. That's our best bet for getting what we want.
     
  20. Black Rifle

    Black Rifle TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Messages:
    100
    Pat Kelley,

    The politicians we might just be able to handle. It's traitorous sympathizers like you who really worry me!

    Mark
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.