Printable View
Obama vs. Romney 101: 4 ways they compare on gun control
Patrik Jonnson
Christian Science Monitor
September 9th, 2012
Second Amendment BriefingQuote:
Here is how President Obama and Mitt Romney have addressed support for the Second Amendment and gun-control laws, as well as whether they own guns and how their vice presidential candidates stack up.
Thanks for keeping me updated!
Obama said and did what!
'the only gun-control laws he has signed as president have been to expand gun rights – allowing guns on national park lands and Amtrak trains. He also said this year that “hunting and shooting are part of a cherished national heritage.”
Romney-“There’s no question I support Second Amendment rights, but I also support an assault weapon ban,” he said in 2007, referring to his signing of a Massachusetts assault-weapons ban in 2004.
Very interesting, i did not know Romney was Anti 2A.
Yes, 0bama said and did as was pointed out.
What they are not saying is that the legislation he signed was buried in an Omnibus budget act, and he didn't have much choice but to sign it. The prez does not have a line item veto.
And the phrase that is attributed "hunting and shooting are part of a cherished national heritage”, has been taken out of context. It is quite common for the anti's to use that or a similar phrase, just be for they launch into the "common sense" proposals that they want to foist off on us. "Hunting and shooting" is not what is spelled out in the 2nd Amendment.
What about Romneys record of willingness to sign legislation against the Second Amendment?Quote:
Originally Posted by Roundballer
Maybe Mitt has not been as pro gun as we would like, but Obama is more anti 2A than we need.
Lets be up front on things..... I don't support Romney based on a single issue. I am more concerned with the over-all welfare of the nation. The nomination for appointment to SCOTUS is foremost in my thoughts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenbow
As far as Romneys 2A record, again the whole story is not being told. Romney did sign, and at that time supported the legislation in Massachusetts. The legislation was supported by both sides of the gun question and stripped away a lot of red tape that was in Mass law. It just had a few clauses that went the wrong way. Romney signed what was presented to him and supported by the majority of the populous. I can't help it that Mass is full of FUDDS.
Romney is currently saying that more restrictions would not have prevented the theater shooting in CO, and does not support further bans. He may have seen the light, or he may be just saying what he thinks the people want to hear. They are both nothing more than politicians, that means that there is more than a 50/50 chance that they will flip/flop at the drop of a hat.
In any case, neither of them can sign something that is not presented to them. There is just the problem of one of them trying to do everything by executive order.
Based on what?Quote:
Originally Posted by CyborgWarrior
His record.Quote:
Originally Posted by 35percent
I think it is important to understand that any politician who supports gun control is a target. The Dems learned during the Clinton admin from the AWB that it is a death knell to support anti gun legislation. The Republicrats know this as well. It is basically a non issue except for a lame duck president who has continually expounded anti-gun rhetoric and has an anti-gun Attorney general and senate. So Obama has talked much, done little because he couldn't. In his next term he will be free to turn up the heat, and he will if re-elected.