How important is the 2A to your vote?

[JAB]

Maybe this belongs more in the 'general' section but it relates to politics so I put it here. Of course, I have no problem with it being moved if need be.

Thinking toward the elections later this year, I started considering which issues upon which I really want to know the various candidates' - especially gubernatorial candidates' - stance. Of course, their stance on the Second Amendment in general and handgun carry, in particular, are of great importance, to me.

I don't want to be a 'one issue' voter and there are other issues on which I want to know a candidate's stance. That said, I believe that with all the various 'issues' at play in modern elections, it is impossible to know everything about how a candidate stands on every issue - plus, honestly, there are some issues that are 'hot buttons' for others that just don't really matter, to me. Therefore, I use a few issues - including firearms rights - as a sort of 'litmus test' of whether I want to know more about a candidate's views or not. In other words, if I agree with a candidate's stance on firearms rights but disagree with everything else, I probably won't vote for him/her - but if I agree with him/her on everything else but totally disagree with their views on firearms rights, that would also be enough to keep me from voting for him/her. I'm just wondering how others approach the voting decision.

Edited June 9, 2010 by JAB

[Falcon1]

I tend to look at it as a "constitutional governance" issue. If they truly support the U.S. Constitution and the Tennessee Constitution, then they will perforce support the Second Amendment as well. OMO-YMMV.

[Raoul]

I tend to look at it as a "constitutional governance" issue. If they truly support the U.S. Constitution and the Tennessee Constitution, then they will perforce support the Second Amendment as well. OMO-YMMV.

Agreed. I think of it as a bellweather issue. Pro 2A is a pretty good indicator of the type of thinking a candidate has. Hopefully...

[Volzfan]

Agreed. I think of it as a bellweather issue. Pro 2A is a pretty good indicator of the type of thinking a candidate has. Hopefully...

Yep!

[Guest Straight Shooter]

Ill put it like this.

I will support a candidate who is strong 2A, even if I differ on some other issues.

I will NOT support a candidate for ANY dang reason if they are either weak or anti-2A. An elected official, especially in todays uber-liberal, scared of every f-ing thing in the world society, who still recognizes not only the RIGHT we have to carry, but also the IMPORTANCE of having an armed, law-abiding populace, well thats somebody I can work with.

[Bigiron]

If a candidate doesn't support my 2A right, he most likely won't support any other of my rights.

[K191145]

If a candidate doesn't respect the 2nd Amendment, then they don't respect the Constitution and Bill Of Rights as a whole. I can't vote for someone like that no more than I could vote for someone who advocates restricting free speech or privacy.

[Worriedman]

Pretty much I think most here are of a mind that strong support of the 2nd Amendment is a precursor for consideration of backing. If a candidate does not exhibit that, I am not interested.

But, like a Harry Reed or a John Tanner, they can have a A+ NRA rating and I have to look at other issues as well. Just because they espouse upholding the 2nd, does not mean they can throw the rest of the Constitution away, and me work and vote for them. Some will use a profession of staunch 2nd Amendment beliefs as a blanket to pull over the eyes of the electorate.

In today's world, the 2nd is a limiting factor, but not the only one.

[Guest SUNTZU]

All of the above. The second amendment gives me a chance of restoring the rest.

We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom:

the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.

If a candidate is afraid of that good, if he understands it and supports it even better.

Edited June 9, 2010 by SUNTZU

[DWARREN123]

Very. To my way of thinking it is a weather vane on how they feel and will vote on other rights.

[eapking]

Agreed. I think of it as a bellweather issue. Pro 2A is a pretty good indicator of the type of thinking a candidate has. Hopefully...

Exactly. While 2A is not the only thing I look at, it's the first thing. It tells a lot about the rest of the person. Of course, if you're an anti, or a wannabee (Haslam) you're not getting my vote.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If they don't support the 2nd, they probably feel the same about the rest.

[JAB]

Sounds like we are all pretty much thinking the same way - that our Second Amendment rights are important not only in and of themselves but also as they indicate how a candidate views a citizen's relationship with his or her government. Generally, I think that a candidate that doesn't show strong support of the Second Amendment has decided that honest citizens can't be trusted and need to be dependent on the government for even the most fundamental of protections - the protection of one's very life and the lives of loved ones.

Thanks for the replies!

[daddyo]

While not a one-issue voter, where the candidate stands on the 2nd pretty much tells me where he/she stands on the rest. Not always, but most of the time.

[G27]

Pretty much I think most here are of a mind that strong support of the 2nd Amendment is a precursor for consideration of backing. If a candidate does not exhibit that, I am not interested.

But, like a Harry Reed or a John Tanner, they can have a A+ NRA rating and I have to look at other issues as well. Just because they espouse upholding the 2nd, does not mean they can throw the rest of the Constitution away, and me work and vote for them. Some will use a profession of staunch 2nd Amendment beliefs as a blanket to pull over the eyes of the electorate.

In today's world, the 2nd is a limiting factor, but not the only one.

Big +1.

[eapking]

Yeah, I have not figured out Harry Reid yet. Which just goes to show ya...

[Guest oldsmobile98]

The 2nd Amendment is definitely a big factor. Being pro-life is the biggest issue for me, though.

Respect for the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law is important. A solid understanding of the Founders' vision is a rare quality indeed; and in my opinion, this is what separates the statesmen from the politicians. If you understand that what sets apart America from the other nations is the principle of individual liberty, then you "get it", and you are gonna try to make sure the citizens hang onto their money.

If you are like most officials and are willing to encroach just a little on some liberties in order to get the "awesome newfangled thingamajig" accomplished ... then you're just another politician to me. I might vote for you (if the other candidates are even more cool with encroachment), but I won't enjoy it.

[Defender]

Probably the single biggest issue for me. Without the 2nd Amendment, you won't have the 1st, or the others.

[TN-popo]

My issues...

Constitution (2A extra focus)

Immigration

Tax Reform

If they're square with me on those issues, they're probably going to be square with me on alot more.

If I disagree with them on any of the above, I can't vote for them.

Edited June 23, 2010 by TN-popo

[tnhawk]

The Constitution isn't a buffet! If a politician will not uphold all of it he shouldn't be in office.

[wjh2657]

The 2nd Amendment is definitely a big factor. Being pro-life is the biggest issue for me, though.

Respect for the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law is important. A solid understanding of the Founders' vision is a rare quality indeed; and in my opinion, this is what separates the statesmen from the politicians. If you understand that what sets apart America from the other nations is the principle of individual liberty, then you "get it", and you are gonna try to make sure the citizens hang onto their money.

If you are like most officials and are willing to encroach just a little on some liberties in order to get the "awesome newfangled thingamajig" accomplished ... then you're just another politician to me. I might vote for you (if the other candidates are even more cool with encroachment), but I won't enjoy it.

Here we go again:

You claim to be in favor of defending individual liberty yet you advocate government control of a woman's liberty. Abortion is a moral and religious issue and should not be not a political one. The truth is that it needs to be taken out of the religious/moral arena and some serious scientific and medical debate taken place. Are you you in favor of individual liberty so long as it fits your own religion or moral code? That isn't pro-liberty .

I am not pro-choice or pro-life, I just don't know enough about the issue outside of what I hear in church to able to make an intelligent stand. Churches don't dictate nor are they in any position to interpret the Constitution, they can't even agree among themselves as to what is right or wrong.

There too many people out there using religious and moral arguments against my carrying a gun. CCW is a legal issue not a moral issue. And I believe that the legality is the Second Amendment. I also believe all other rights need to be protected!

Edited June 18, 2010 by wjh2657

[molonlabetn]

Yes, by default, since I only vote for candidates who will work to maintain the Constitution, not undermine or try to get around it. If they will not defend the Constitution they are campaigning in the wrong country.

[TN-popo]

Here we go again:

You claim to be in favor of defending individual liberty yet you advocate government control of a woman's liberty. Abortion is a moral and religious issue and should not be not a political one. The truth is that it needs to be taken out of the religious/moral arena and some serious scientific and medical debate taken place. Are you you in favor of individual liberty so long as it fits your own religion or moral code? That isn't pro-liberty .

I am not pro-choice or pro-life, I just don't know enough about the issue outside of what I hear in church to able to make an intelligent stand. Churches don't dictate nor are they in any position to interpret the Constitution, they can't even agree among themselves as to what is right or wrong.

There too many people out there using religious and moral arguments against my carrying a gun. CCW is a legal issue not a moral issue. And I believe that the legality is the Second Amendment. I also believe all other rights need to be protected!

You're argument makes sense to those that do not consider a fetus a human life.

For those that do consider it a human life, abortion is no different than a mother slitting her 3 month old's throat. Individual liberty has no bearing on that situation.

Many of our laws are based on moral issues. This issue is no different.

[macville]

You're argument makes sense to those that do not consider a fetus a human life.

For those that do consider it a human life, abortion is no different than a mother slitting her 3 month old's throat. Individual liberty has no bearing on that situation.

Many of our laws are based on moral issues. This issue is no different.

Bingo! Most of our laws are based on moral ideas. Murder law is based on the moral idea that you have the right to life. Robbery law is based on the morals that stealing is bad. Rape law is based on morals. The list goes on. We as a country started sharing the same morals for the most part. Even those founding fathers who people claim were not "Christian", still seemed to share the same moral code as "Christians."

When it comes to abortion and women screaming about their rights. I simply ask, "what about the rights of the person you are wanting to kill?" Normally, they will stammer on about how it's not a person, but I beg to differ. Science is only showing us more and more how it is a human (I mean, if you didn't kill it, it WOULD BE an alive human...)

Matthew

[gregintenn]

I've never knowingly voted for anyone who was anti second ammendment. As others have stated, if a politician is the enemy of the second ammendment, he likely considers the entire constitution toilet paper.