Presidential Candidates & the 2nd Amendment

[majdad93]

What about the 2nd Amendment (2A) in the Republican presidential debates? I know I can't be the only Forum member who has noticed the almost total absence of 2A discussion in the ongoing debates. My wife and I have watched almost all of these (18 or so?) since the start of the 2012 election campaign. As I recall there was only one debate where the issue was put to the candidates; this being Juan Williams on a FOX News debate a few weeks back. Each of the candidates was given a question and each gave what I will call a "non-answer." It alarms us that there is not more emphasis put on this "First of all Freedoms" by the candidates for Commander-in-Chief.

In my mind, Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) was an unquestionable 2A supporter running for president. Any governor who goes jogging without his security detail and shoots a coyote attacking a family dog has got my attention. Responding to anti-gun news media fanatics who question him about rumors of lawfully carrying a concealed weapon on the campaign trail with a remark like "That's why call it's concealed" also got my attention.

Rick Santorum claims to have a 100% A+ NRA rating, but his prospects of a Republican nomination appear to have dimmed even more after today's Florida Primary. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), well he has his struggles, too. I expected a stronger advocacy for the 2A than he has given. President Obama, at least, is a known quantity as to his position on the 2A. There can be little doubt as to his disdain for our gun rights: witness his voting record in the Illinois Legislature; his outspoken opposition to concealed carry; his nominations to the US Supreme Court; and what should be a huge embarassment to his administration with the Fast & Furious caper.

Where do we go from here on the way to the ballot box in 2012? Any one?

[Kid Sopris]

I think everyone realizes that Talking Negatively about the 2nd Amendment is political suicide...BUT Gun Sales are up, so that means one of two things:

You either get to vote for a Progressive with Socialist Tendencies, or A Progressive with Captalists Tendencies.

NOT much of a choice, huh ? Vote for the Gun !

[Bart45]

Doesn't Massachusetts have a boatload of restrictive gun laws?

[ohiobuckeye]

Before Guy probably closes this as a political thread, I would say none of the current crop of republicans can be trusted to protect our gun rights. With the possible exception of Ron Paul(who has no chance to win), I think any one of them would throw us under the bus in future deal makings that benefit them. Even though they may keep their "promise" to not initiate any anti gun legislation, don't bet the farm they would not stab us in the back if anti gun laws were part of a package deal with a pet project they wanted to pass. Romney is a sure bet for a sneak attack, Gingrich has done it before, and Santorum is another snake oil salesman following in their footsteps.

[SCone]

Hmmm.... trust a politician? Not sure if it can done.

[kenhwind]

This is why a pro-gun Senate is more important than the POTUS. The House is pretty much pro-gun, but with some very rabid-anti-gunners. Harry Reid may act pro-gun only because he has to, but rest assured he is lock step with the rest of liberal socialists.

[Wyatt Burp]

The 2000 election scared anti-gun politicians who are about 98% democrat. Al Gore lost his home state with the tireless help of Charlton Heston getting out the pro-gun vote that year in Tennessee. so now they consider gun control as a third rail they won't touch except stealthily like Fast and Furious. And anti-gun legislation is still subtly attached to bills but have been defeated by the House. Romney was anti-gun, pro choice, and pro- gov. healthcare in a very liberal state. Was it just to get along and will he change nationally? I think so since he's trying so hard to reinvent himself as a conservative. I don't know about the other guys but I'll tell you this. The Washington D.C. gun ban reversal and Second Amendment verification by the Supreme Court would never have happened had not Bush beat Gore and then nominated Roberts and Alito.
A Republican HAS to win this election because Ginsberg will retire in the next four years. If Obama wins you cannot count on a Republican Senate to block anti-constitution nominees because they don't have the spine to do so. And Repub. presidents have messed up nominating the right people, too. So vote Republican for prez and hopefully win back the Senate and you'll have a better chance of getting people like Scalia (my favorite living American) nominated. If libs run the courts nothing else matters anyway. And the Supreme Court is one vote away from disregarding the Constitution altogether. And I bet that's the end of this thread.

[majdad93]

Well, if Guy closes this thread for being political in nature, I will apologize now. I feel that nothing I wrote in the original post was anything other than fact. No political malice was intended; merely an intent to stimulate discussion on 2A issues and where our Presidential hopefuls stand in this regard. I don't know everything and can't see every angle on anything; hence I started this thread. I just like to "pick" the brains of my fellow 2A patriots. Thanx to all who added their thoughts.

[Wyatt Burp]

I think it's super relevant and worth discussing but do know such things get cut off before they get what would be considered overbored where people start arguing. I'm glad you brought it up.

[22-rimfire]

Gingrich and Santorim have a good record. Romney has a poor record but he claims to support 2A issues since he is no longer govenor of MA.

It is not talked about because there is no active legislation being considered by Congress and Obama is keeping his mouth shut although I believe he would sign restrictive gun legislation if it came to his desk.