It looks like gun owners will be the losers in 2012

[Glenn]

I am not strictly a one issue voter, but a candidates stand on gun ownership is my number one determining issue. 2012 looks really bad for gun owners. I don't need to go into Obama's record. Mitt Romney, the likely Republican candidate, supports the Brady Registration Act, mandatory 5-day waiting periods, mandatory firearms ID cards, the Federal Feinstein Gun Ban (so-called "assault weapons ban") and he signed the Massachusetts Semi-Auto Ban in 2004.

Rick Santorum voted to support the Lautenberg Gun Ban in the 90s. He voted for a bill in 1999 that included a provision to require federal background checks at gun shows. In 2000, Santorum voted to force pawn shops to require a background check on anyone coming into the store to sell a firearm. He voted with gun-controlling Democrats Dianne Fienstein and Frank Lautenberg to mandate locks on handguns in 2005.

Newt Gingrich supports the Brady National Gun Registry, a national biometric thumbprint database for gun purchasers, the Lautenberg Gun Ban and the “Criminal Safezones Act."

Rick Perry as Governor of Texas, did make some improvements in state law for gun owners and claims on his website to be pro 2nd amendment but does any one think he has a snowballs chance in hell of getting the nomination?

That leaves Ron Paul, who is very pro gun, but his views on foreign policy are scary, and I really don't think he has a chance of getting the nomination, much less beating Obama.

Dark days are ahead for American gun owners

Glenn

[BryanP]

Realistically? Things have progressively gotten better for gun owners for the past several years. Most Democrats, President Obama included, know that whatever their personal beliefs may be, gun control is a vote-losing issue for them. Republicans know better than to mess with that issue too.

Does that mean we should ease up? Oh hell no. Make sure they know we aren't to be ignored or forgotten. Remind them regularly what the AWB vote in '94 cost the Democrats.

[k9wh91984]

I am seriously worried of another AWB myself! Makes me wanna go buy another AK right now!

[Westwindmike]

If Obama wins, AR's and AK's will skyrocket in price. Stock up now!

[kieefer]

Well I support Rick Santorum for now and while searching the web I found this tidbit,

In 2006 the NRA endorsed Rick Santorum overBob Casey, Jr. even though they both had an "A" rating from the NRA Political Victory Fund, because of Santorum's history of support for the NRA's interests in Congress.

I ran across a the piece at ammoland.com where Dudley Brown is critical of RS but this was all I could find. This piece is also used by the Paul campaign to smear RS.

Below is how he voted,

• Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
  
• Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
  
• Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
  
• Voted YES on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
  
• Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
  
• Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)
  

It's always a crap shoot with these guys but RickS seems to me to be best of the bunch. We do know that BHO has an agenda and gun owners may be his next target.

[Guest ThePunisher]

I am not strictly a one issue voter, but a candidates stand on gun ownership is my number one determining issue. 2012 looks really bad for gun owners. I don't need to go into Obama's record. Mitt Romney, the likely Republican candidate, supports the Brady Registration Act, mandatory 5-day waiting periods, mandatory firearms ID cards, the Federal Feinstein Gun Ban (so-called "assault weapons ban") and he signed the Massachusetts Semi-Auto Ban in 2004.

Rick Santorum voted to support the Lautenberg Gun Ban in the 90s. He voted for a bill in 1999 that included a provision to require federal background checks at gun shows. In 2000, Santorum voted to force pawn shops to require a background check on anyone coming into the store to sell a firearm. He voted with gun-controlling Democrats Dianne Fienstein and Frank Lautenberg to mandate locks on handguns in 2005.

Newt Gingrich supports the Brady National Gun Registry, a national biometric thumbprint database for gun purchasers, the Lautenberg Gun Ban and the “Criminal Safezones Act."

Rick Perry as Governor of Texas, did make some improvements in state law for gun owners and claims on his website to be pro 2nd amendment but does any one think he has a snowballs chance in hell of getting the nomination?

That leaves Ron Paul, who is very pro gun, but his views on foreign policy are scary, and I really don't think he has a chance of getting the nomination, much less beating Obama.

Dark days are ahead for American gun owners

Glenn

Yep!

[kieefer]

Where Do They Stand

Well, the info is out there just got to sort through it all.

[DaveTN]

If the President is elected on the issues, Jobs and the economy will be the deciding factor. However, I believe the President will be elected based on social welfare programs and whether or not he is a minority. Anyone that is a serious contender will be supportive of background checks.

Your state politicians will be more key in deciding what the guns laws will be.

Of course Obama would like to reinstate the assault weapons ban, but it has to have a new name. Maybe they can call it something more innocent sounding like…. CIFTA.

We need jobs, we need our manufacturing base back, and we need a President that can help make that happen to get our economy back on track.

I believe that the poor, the minorities, and the Democrats are more united and more focused on what they want, and will vote that way. They want government handouts, free medical care, big government to give them jobs they couldn’t qualify for in the private sector, and gun control.

The middle and upper class republicans tend to get split on the candidates and can’t maintain focus or even decide what the most important issues are.

I will vote for whoever I think can help our economy recover and put Americans back to work. I don’t care if he has a gun with a slash tattooed on his forehead.

[Oh Shoot]

...Mitt Romney, the likely Republican candidate, supports the Brady Registration Act, mandatory 5-day waiting periods, mandatory firearms ID cards, the Federal Feinstein Gun Ban (so-called "assault weapons ban") and he signed the Massachusetts Semi-Auto Ban in 2004....

Mitt may get as running mate Chris Christie, who has said more than once that NJ's gun laws are "about right".

As for Mitt, my continuing favorite summation:

- OS

[mav]

Mitt may get as running mate Chris Christie, who has said more than once that NJ's gun laws are "about right".

That would be a really s****y ticket. I hate to say that I would vote for it, but lets hope it never comes to fruition.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I don't like Mitt either, but don't you think a majority House and Senate by Republicans

would control the dialogue? Mitt sticks his finger in the wind to determine the political

current and I think with someone other than Boehner, some control could be returned

to the Congress regardless of which President we have. Obama could possibly be put

in check.

[Oh Shoot]

I don't like Mitt either, but don't you think a majority House and Senate by Republicans

would control the dialogue? Mitt sticks his finger in the wind to determine the political

current and I think with someone other than Boehner, some control could be returned

to the Congress regardless of which President we have. Obama could possibly be put

in check.

Certainly with BHO in WH but with GOP controlling Senate/House, would likely mostly be stalemate.

But BHO can veto any bills, and unlikely to have 2/3 to override all of them.

Then again, maybe stalemate between the two tyrannies is the best we can hope for anymore. To put an optimistic spin on things.

- OS

[mav]

Certainly with BHO in WH but with GOP controlling Senate/House, would likely mostly be stalemate.

But BHO can veto any bills, and unlikely to have 2/3 to override all of them.

Then again, maybe stalemate between the two tyrannies is the best we can hope for anymore. To put an optimistic spin on things.

- OS

Oh, I don't think it will be a stalemate. Even if the GOP controls both houses, the ball will still be in Obama's court. He will just use executive orders, recess appointments, etc... unless the house initiates impeachment and the senate take it up, which I think is highly unlikely.

Even if this scenario happens, I think it will be worse than the first Obama term. What will Obama have to lose during his second term? He doesn't have to worry about reelction, so he will pull out all the stops.

"When congress won't act, I feel I have an obligation and duty to go around congress" (paraphrasing)

[Oh Shoot]

...What will Obama have to lose during his second term? He doesn't have to worry about reelction, so he will pull out all the stops.

"When congress won't act, I feel I have an obligation and duty to go around congress" (paraphrasing)

Oh, totally agree.

There's the normal lesser of two evils, but this time it's gotta be Gag Me With A Backhoe Romney over The Absolute Frigging Prince of Darkness. Just gotta be.

- OS

[Garufa]

I have never been in more despair for this country that I am now. We truly are ****ed.

[1gewehr]

This is why it is more important than ever to continue to get rid of the non-conservative people in Congress. Quite frankly, the current crop of Presidential candidates are ALL anti-gun except Ron Paul. Whether you support him or not, he is still a very slim prospect to be President.

IF BHO wins, we will need a very strong pro-freedom Congress that will not let BHO get away with anything like our current Congress will.

If a RINO wins, we will need that pro-freedom Congress for the same reasons.

[gregintenn]

Potential Supreme Court appointments within the next 4 years are the only thing keeping me from voting for Obama in 2012. I dislike him as much if not more than anyone here, but I am quickly building a strong distaste for the entire Republican party. The field of primary candidates is pitiful. If this is the best and the brightest in the Republican party, screw them.

[greenego]

If Obama wins a second term, I don't think a Republican controlled House and Senate will stop anything he wants to do. Look at the track record so far. Key word is WILL. Do the Republicans have any?

[gregintenn]

The Republican party wants control. Historically, they have shown that when they've gained control, they have no idea what to do with it. Imagine Wiley Coyote actually catching the Roadrunner. "What now?"

[mikegideon]

The Republican party wants control. Historically, they have shown that when they've gained control, they have no idea what to do with it. Imagine Wiley Coyote actually catching the Roadrunner. "What now?"

Simple... we need a new Roadrunner, even if we have to make one up.

[hornett22]

That would be a really s****y ticket. I hate to say that I would vote for it, but lets hope it never comes to fruition.

I really don't see how you could. A Romney/Christie ticket is a hell of a lot scarier than what we have now.

[eapking]

I really don't see how you could. A Romney/Christie ticket is a hell of a lot scarier than what we have now.

True, this.

Has the NRA given out any grades/ratings on this pack of Repubs?

[Oh Shoot]

True, this.

Has the NRA given out any grades/ratings on this pack of Repubs?

Santorum claims to have A+, other than that don't know, haven't heard any of them touting it, can't find it on NRA site.

Perry and Bachman I'm sure had high ones, too.

- OS

[Dolomite_supafly]

I will say this, if I can't vote for Ron Paul I will vote for Obama.

Not because I like Obama any more than anyone else but because the Republicans are just as bad. Regardless of who wins the election we, as a nation, are going to get screwed. I am going to let the Republican party know my intentions as well as follow through.

I was having a bad day yesterday and it apparently clouded my judgement. No way in the world I would vote for Obama.

The Republicans we have now are nothing more than a Democrat from 30-40 years ago.

There are no more true Republicans alive or that are willing to run with the exception of Ron Paul. The rest of the Republican party are corrupt, self serving individuals that want nothing more than to control us so they can fund their own personal agendas.

The difference between today's Republicans and the Democrats is Republicans want our money to line their own pockets and the Democrats want our money so they can give it to citizens. And personally if I am going to give my money to someone I want it to go to someone who needs it rather than someone who wants it.

Any justices getting appointed, by either party, is going to be a blow against the American people and our way of life.

What I wish would happen is remove the ® or (D) next to candidates name. That would force people to at least research the candidates rather than vote along party lines. Voting along party lines is the most foolish thing anyone can do, at least for someone who actually cares for their country.

We can't have a popular vote which is idiotic and we can't vote for who we want to unless it is among a pre approved list.

It also says a lot when Jimmy Carter endorses Mitt Romney, the current front runner.

Dolomite

Edited January 11, 2012 by Dolomite_supafly

[Oh Shoot]

....Any justices getting appointed, by either party, is going to be a blow against the American people and our way of life. ..

I'm afraid you'll eat those words down the road if O is reelected and the GOP doesn't win the Senate, so that O gets free reign on the next 1-4 appointments in his second term.

We probably are going to face some Big Bad Stuff either way but there's no sense putting it on warp speed by giving The Prince of Frigging Darkness four more years -- and a legacy of decades.

- OS