Posted: 1/28/2008 3:50:46 AM EDT
|
I searched your threads and I can't find anything. Exactly how Anti-Gun is he and what do you think we as a country can expect from him on 2A issues if he wins the presidency. Do you think it'll be any better than if a Dem wins? |
|
He tried to ban ALL Utah CCW permit holders from carrying guns within x miles of the Olympics when he was running the Olympics in Utah. He kissed up to the local Brady Bunch while signing legislation re-affirming the permanent AWB/hi-cap ban in MA. He purposely did not invite the MA pro-gun group to the bill signing (it also extended the LTC from 4 to 6 years and a few other minor pluses for legal gun owners). His press conference at the signing was enough to make us puke. He's anti-gun . . . but will kiss up to NRA (recent life membership) if he thinks it will give him votes in Middle America. When the rubber meets the road, he'll screw legal gun owners without raising an eyebrow. |
|
I don't think any of the Republicans are really going to impose any more anti-gun legislation. I firmly believ that Obama or Clinto will though, and thats why any republican candidate is better then those two. Romney included. I'm not a huge Romney far or anything, but if he gets the nomination and gets elected I think he will do the right thing in office. And to the OP, ARFCOM is not the be all end all of political thought. You may be better off doing your own reasearch on the topic instead of listening to a few opinions of someone. Most consensus now a day is based upon just that. One person listening to a few others thoughts, then those thoughts become their own and they pass them along to more people creating a cycle based upon no real substance. Check Romneys website to see his views, do extensive searches online for his voteing recored, etc. Then form your own opinion of the man. Don't just regurgitate others opinions. |
|
A person's previous action is a far better precursor of future actions then their words spoken during an election season. Mitt Romney was the Governor of Mass. when the federal AWB expired, and made sure that the residents of Mass were "safe" by signing a statewide version of that same AWB into effect. His stance has recently waffled, but his record is clear. |
So I guess nobody is ever allowed to change thier mind or opinion on something without being called a "flip flopper" or a "waffler" then? So I'm guessing anything you've done in your past that your not proud of is how you should be judged for the rest of your life? Every opinion you've ever had since you were 5 years old is still intact and unchanged? The guy will not impose any more anti-gun legislation, none of the republicans will, regardless of past action. I'm not saying I'm a Romney guy, because I am not, but I think a lot of people, espicially around this website, are very unfair to him. |
| I never said that people are not entitled to change their views. Lord knows I have changed my outlook on things over time. I was simply asking a question about past facts on record and opinions of a possibly future. Except for past unfavorable votes on 2a issues, I think he is a good candidate overall. |
I wasn't referring to you with that comment. I was referring to Aang |
Hey there CTBuilder, I didn't call Mitt a "waffler", I stated that his stance on this issue has recently waffled. I also am not referring to things he thought or did as a 5 year old, so I'm not sure where your comparison to my childhood ideology fits in. I am not judging Mr. Romney on his childhood decisions, nor do I pretend to be the omnipotent Romney critic who is lurking ready to pounce on any Romney threads. You'll find this was my first post here regarding any political candidate at all... On December 16, 2007 Mitt Romney was on Meet the Press with Tim Russert. This was 1 month ago. He made his stance clear at that time, here is a transcript of the conversation. You'll need to flip the page to see the completion of the firearm legislation line of questioning: Meet the Press transcript From the wording of your questions to me, you seem to think that Mr. Romney now isn't proud of the votes he cast or the stances he has taken. Your analogy to my childhood would be appropriate were I referring in my original post to things Mitt though of 40 years ago. As quoted above in last month's interview, this clearly is not the case. While researching which candidate I personally was going to vote for, I've read a bit about each of the contenders. My opinion of his stance based on his own words and actions both in his voting history and recent political interviews led me to my original post. I apologize if you disliked the word "waffled" in my posting, but let's keep the discussion focused on the potential POTUS and his record and current aspirations. He clearly stated a month ago what his stance was on weapon bans and the Brady Bill. It's in print (and video) there for everyone to see and interpret for themselves as they decide whom to vote for. I wholeheartedly agree with your stance that everyone should do their own research and make their own educated decision on whom to back in the election race. I stand by my comment as my own opinion, and certainly don't feel I was unfair to the candidate by believing his own words and actions. Best wishes. 
|
My wording was rather generalized. I am not implying he did anything he is not proud of I just was trying to make a general point. I am glad you clarified your position and I respect your opinion (especially because it has substance to it). It just gets tiring to see so many people bashing candidates for the sake of bashing candidates. There is so many Ron Paul threads on here that are all about how great he is and how everyone else is a RINO and I am fed up with it. I am a Rudy supporter first and foremost, but I will support whoever gets the Republican nomination. |
Just thought I'd pop in and point out that Mitt Romney did NOT sign any kind of 'AWB extension' in MA like everyone (including himself) is saying. To clarify, in '98 MA enacted a state AWB under Governor Paul Cellucci that mirrored the '94 Federal ban, only the MA ban did not have a sunset clause. What Mitt Romney signed was a bill that increased our licensing period from 4 to 6 years, increased our LTC registration cost to $100 (a mere 200% increase over the propsed 400% increase  ), some other meaningless crap I can't remember, and then the one little thing that everyone gets hung up on... a line was added to the MA AWB that merely referenced a document from the Federal ban. It didn't change anything, didn't extend anything, it merely clarified an already clear piece of text. It was a fluff piece for the Gun Control advocates so they could agree with the bill.SO, while Mitt Romney certainly was no friend to gun owners in MA during his term, he didn't do us much harm, either. However, he was in a position to reverse some of our insanely draconian laws and he did nothing, so in my book that makes him an asshat and a RINO of the highest order. |
|
As a resident of MA during Romney's term as Gov, I can confirm that z0mbi's statement of record is correct. While Romney is clearly not "pro-gun", he isn't really anti-gun either. He left MA gun laws status quo. It was the MA legislature that kept passing anti-gun laws and my fellow residents just let it happen and didn't even try to get pro-gun candidates elected. In most cases, nobody would even run against the Dems that were and continue today creating the anti-gun laws. I got fed up and moved to a better state - NH. We take our 'Live Free or Die' motto seriously and I'm disappointed that the to watch the original craddle of freedom slowly die..... So on the Rep' side you can either vote for Romney who is relatively neutral on gun control issues or you can vote for McCain who has a demonstrated track record of supporting illegal immigrants and laws that violate our freedom of speech.... If we all believe in Ron Paul's views...why won't you vote for him? |
|
I live right on the border of CT and MA. I can remember being really excited for MA when Mitt was running for Gov. Finally, if he gets elected, MA gun owners will have a chance to remove some of the crap that was steadily eroding their 2A rights. Mitt was a guest of Howie Carr just before the election and I was listening intently. After their banter, Howie took the first call for Mitt. They caller asked the one, single question that would have been mine. The caller told Mitt how great it was to have a real conservative running for Gov of such a blue state. The caller then said he was a gun collector and shooter. "What will you do to help us gain back some of the rights we've lost over the past couple of years? ". Mitt replied: "Nothing. I feel that the laws on the books right now are fine and we can live with them as they are.". Will, wasn't I deflated. I'm sure the caller was, too. He was speechless. Mitt doesn't appear to be a fan of 2A, at least not in public. Maybe he was preaching to the "moderate" liberals for their votes which he needed to be elected. Maybe Mitt was just being honest and believes in all those dumb high-cap mag laws and in the AW regs. In any event, he had the opportunity to delcare himself and didn't. He probably didn't loose any 2a supporter votes because the alternative to Mitt was a lot worse. If anything, he did gain some of the middle-of-the-road liberals who were on the fence. I, too, believe that between McCain and Mitt, Mitt would be the better man for the job. However, there would be NO CHOICE between McCain and either Hillary or Barry. I can hold my nose with the best of 'em. Rome |
There is a lot of confusion on what Romney signed and said. Your post was concise and helped clarify things for me, thanks! There are a lot of references to Romney signing new weapons bans into effect. While searching for a candidate, these are the type of articles on Romney I find: "Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban" These all reference that the state of MA awb was scheduled to expire in September 2004. Are you guys saying that the original MA law was permanent? Every link I find shows that the AWB was scheduled to expire 09/2004 and Romney was the Governor that signed this permanent ban into effect. "“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,” Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen’s groups and gun safety advocates. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”" Mitt Romney, July 2004. Other links to the fact that Romney "signed into law" an AWB for Mass: Press Release These all refer to 07/01/2004 and the fact that Romney signed into effect a permanent AWB as the previous ban was scheduled to expire in 9/2004. Are they all wrong? Was the Cellucci awb permanent or was it indeed set to expire? I'd like to know the facts on that, but trying to find the wording of the original ban is proving difficult for me. It's interesting that Romney would take credit for (and state repeatedly) that he was the person who signed a MA ban into effect, yet others say that Mitt isn't telling the truth when he says so. I'm not sure it matters at this point, but just for knowledge's sake I'd love to see the law's text. Your input as members that lived in MA during this period is invaluable, and thanks for sharing the facts with us!
|
It's interesting the amount of misinformation that goes around the net. I believe it all stems from the news media organizations writing articles and reporting on news that they themselves have only a cursory understanding of. All it takes is one credible news reporter to say "Romney signed an AWB extension" and it becomes fact. I am a member of the Massachusetts GOAL organization. They worked with Romney on the legislation that he is being blamed/applauded for regarding the AWB in 2004. They have a very detailed page on their website describing Romney's gun-related activities as Governor, and the best explanation of what 'really' happened in 2004 that I can find. Here is the link to the whole text, but I will quote the section related to this discussion.
So there you have it. GOAL basically attached the Federal exemptions to the MA AWB so that when the Federal ban expired MA couldn't expand the scope of the ban. Regardless, I still don't endorse Romney, I think he would stab us all in the back given the chance. If an even more restrictive than the '94 AWB passed his desk, I don't doubt that he would sign it in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, I bet McCain would, too. |
| I doubt Romney or Mccain will sign any further firearms legislation. I will be voting for Romney on Tues because the thought of Mccain running this country is too much for me. We are down to 3 choices on our side now. Romney, Mccain and Huckabee. And lets be real it's between Romney and Mccain. Out of those two Romney is the better choice. Although I do like Huckabee's fair tax plan. Remember there is more to choosing a candidate then just firearms. |
|
I have read all of what you guys said and wanted to add just my little piece. I work @Umass and routinely do the sound for the meetings of not only the Faculty Senate, but also the MA Board of Regents (when they meet over here, usually in the Massachusetts room in the Mullins Center, but once in the Bernie Dallas room in Goodell). I have personally met Mitt Romney twice (albeit while i was pinning a lapel microphone on him) (yes, Im "that guy"-the AV geek). We were amusing ourselves trying to pick out the MA State Cops (it wasn't hard). Anyway, my personal opinion of the guy (and please remember this is just my own impression, so please no flames) is that he is an empty suit. He really had no personality, his hand-shake was limp and cool (and maybe had some perfume or lotion on there-ewww!), but his hair was perfect. When he adressed the room he said nothing. Just the usual pablum. Watching him talk and say nothing completly turned me off to the guy. Based upon my own experience, and once again, this is my own experience, I would NEVER vote for him. (FWIW, In my job I have met other people too, some better, some worse; like, Bill Cosby, Paul Celluti, John Lott, Paul Hodes, John Olver, John Sununu, et. al. Maybe i should post in the "what famous people have you met" thread.) |
|
Just saw this a few minutes ago: instapundit.com/archives2/014856.php February 03, 2008 The Glenn and Helen Show: Mitt Romney Talks Super Tuesday We've already done our big get-to-know-you interview with Mitt Romney, but with Super Tuesday coming up in a couple of days and the race tight, we thought we'd catch up with him again. We asked him about gun control -- he says he'll veto any gun control bills that cross his desk as President, including a renewal of the "assault weapon" ban, which is more than George W. Bush ever promised -- about the economy (and the Zubrin flexfuel plan), and about John McCain, and Ann Coulter's promise to campaign for Hillary if McCain is nominated. Plus, whether Romney is mean enough for politics. ... Seems a little too good to be true ... and you know what they say about things that are too good to be true 
|
|
I saw that as well... I wish I could feel elated about it, but the guys policies are a moving target. I hate using this term... but Romney really is the epitome of a flip-flopper. He can tell me he won't sign any gun-control legislation all he wants, I don't think I'd ever believe him. Unfortunately... I think our chances are better with Romney than McCain. And Romney's stance (as much weight as that word may have when we're talking about Mitt) on illegal immigration is stronger than McCain's. |
|
Other than an increase in license fees (all fees for everything went up) Romney left gun owners in MA better off than they were when he took office. Not a lot better, but better. Don't base your opinions on the rhetoric or the press reports. That is his record. He has moved gradually toward a better 2A position over the past few months. He is no Fred, but I like him better than McCain. |
He's definitely better than McCain on 2A. I trust Romney as far as I can throw him, but his past record seems to say that it's more likely he will do nothing, rather than something. Nothing good is better than something bad. |
You are correct. The thing about his (elected office) record is that it only consists of a single term as MA governor. People who don't live here AND pay attention cannot possibly understand how completely the deck is stacked against gun owners and republicans here. Our state supreme court has actually ruled that there is NO individual RKBA. Our legislature is 99.9% dem and the all march in anti-gun lockstep. We essentially have a one party system here and how the legislators vote is dictated to them by their leadership. This means that it is virtually impossible to do ANYTHING that the legiislature doesn't want. There is no balance. There is no fairness. There is no "give and take", so a republican governor is basically up against a brick wall when it comes to getting anything at all done. Romney was able to have an effect on a few things, and it was mostly OK, but he simply did not have the votes to get anything big done at all. The best he could do was to work with the legislature to nudge the bills in a direction that was less horrible than they started off in. This is what he did wherever he could. We have ye to see what he would do if he gets a legislative body that will really work with him. |