Newt on Guns.


PDA






Dr.Mall Ninja
December 6, 2011, 11:34 PM
We have a Ron Paul and Mitt Romney thread, I'd like to see what you guys think of Gingrich. I have not much heard his record on RBKA, does anybody know?

If you enjoyed reading about "Newt on Guns." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
XD 45acp
December 6, 2011, 11:45 PM
Here's from his website;
Newt has been long recognized as a strong defender of the Second Amendmentís right to bear arms. Newt is a recipient of the National Rifle Associationís Defender of the Second Amendment Award. His legislative voting record was consistently scored by the NRA as either an A or A+ all 20 years that he served in Congress. Furthermore, Newt is the only candidate in the GOP race who has spoken out about the threat to the second amendment from the United Nations and other global governance organizations, and on the first day, he will instruct the Department of Justice and State Department to defend American sovereignty and block all international treaties that infringe on Second Amendment rights.

can be seen for self at http://www.newt.org/answers#Second

mljdeckard
December 7, 2011, 12:25 AM
(This is why I snicker when people try to say that Ron Paul is the only one who supports gun rights.)

The only thing that comes to mind that Newt had a piece of was the '94 AWB, His opposition set up the upheaval in the midterm elections that gave him the majority.

Anyone else?

henschman
December 7, 2011, 01:09 AM
When Gingrich got elected Speaker, he said "as long as I am Speaker of this House, no gun control legislation is going to move in committee or on the floor of this House and there will be no further erosion of their rights."

He then proceeded to vote for and help pass the Lautenberg Amendment and the Gun Free School Zones Act (laws that Ron Paul has authored legislation to repeal). He called the Lautenberg Amendment "a very reasonable position."
http://gunowners.org/newtgingrich-2012.htm

He also had this to say back in 1997:

"I think we prefer to go to instant check on an immediate basis and try to accelerate implementing instant checks so that you could literally check by thumbprint... Instant check is a much better system than the Brady process." -- June 27, 1997

You really need to look further than a politician's own campaign website to see what they are truly made of. As they say, "past performance is the best indicator of future performance." And like the GOA says, he definitely has a mixed record on this issue.

mljdeckard
December 7, 2011, 01:36 AM
But it's not the ONLY indicator. This is a much different climate than when he was in the house before. What I have to ask myself is; "Is he likely to vote that way NOW?" Ronald Reagan signed the ban on guns in national parks. doesn't mean I wouldn't cut off a finger to get him back.

I don't like Mitt's "Born again gun person" attitudes either. In 2008, he was confronted with the issue, and he gave a response so forced and wooden, I cringed as he was saying it. Something like; "Of course I'm a gun person. At my brother's cabin in Park City, we do in fact keep a Glock pistol and i enjoy shooting it from time to time." Painful. But that doesn't mean I don't believe he hasn't become sufficiently conditioned to vote correctly now. There's no such thing as a perfect candidate. That includes Ron Paul. Another relevant question is; "Which candidate has enough political capital to use to make sure they don't get cornered with an anti-gun rider on a critical bill when they are out of favors and leverage?" You can pretend that the politics game doesn't matter. you can pretend Ron Paul doesn't play it. Doesn't match reality.

I'll say it again. I trust ANY of the republican candidates more than I would like to see what Obama will to to BATFE in a lame duck term. I would support any of them, and I would particularly love to see Gingerich debate Obama.

henschman
December 7, 2011, 02:33 AM
But it's not the ONLY indicator. This is a much different climate than when he was in the house before. What I have to ask myself is; "Is he likely to vote that way NOW?"

Nobody knows what political "climate" we will have in the future... a politician who changes his beliefs depending on the "climate" is dangerous. That is exactly what I'm tired of in politics. And if you aren't considering their past performance, all you have to go on to determine future performance is their word -- and the word of a career politician doesn't hold much water with me.

Thanks, but no thanks -- I will take the guy with the record of being consistently pro-gun and pro-liberty for 30+ years, regardless of what "political climate" he has been in.

cbrgator
December 7, 2011, 04:15 AM
While Ron Paul certainly has maintained the most consistent positions over the longest period of time, let's face reality. He isn't going to win.

Newt may not be as strong or consistent a 2A supporter as Ron Paul, but I don't think our gun rights would be in danger with him in the White House. He may not be the ideal 2A president, but I don't see him as a threat. Plus, I have no doubt that given the opportunity to appoint a new justice to the Supreme Court, his nominee would be pro 2A. (I do have serious concerns with Newt outside 2A issues, but that's off topic here)

Double Vision
December 7, 2011, 07:29 AM
IMHO Newt is the candidate that is best suited to the job.

bigfatdave
December 7, 2011, 08:24 AM
is it that hard to look stuff up on votesmart?
http://www.votesmart.org/candidate/26821/newt-gingrich?categoryId=37

alsaqr
December 7, 2011, 09:49 AM
Thanks Dave.

i watched the US house vote to repeal the AWB. US Reps Solomon of NY gave Kennedy of Rhode Island a wonderful tougue lashing.

Lots of folks have forgotten that 38 members of Gingrich's party voted for the so called "assault weapons ban". They have also forgotten that 76 members of the other party voted against the AWB.

The AWB passed the US house by one vote. At the last moment the retiring house minority leader flip-flopped and voted for the AWB. Two other members of Gingrich's party voted for the AWB after Ronald Reagan made his appeal for its passage.

When the US house passed the repeal of the AWB, 42 members of speaker Gingrich's party voted against the measure.

But opponents of the assault-weapons ban--a 1994 law that prohibits the manufacture and importation of 19 types of semiautomatic assault-style weapons--insisted that it is not a partisan issue. Indeed, 56 Democrats cast votes for repealing the ban and 42 Republicans opposed repeal. "A majority of the members of the 104th Congress are not interested in gun control. They are not interested in government control. They are interested in crime control," said Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), leading proponent of the repeal bill, which included an amendment increasing prison sentences for crimes committed with a gun.

http://articles.latimes.com/1996-03-23/news/mn-50373_1_weapons-ban

esquare
December 7, 2011, 10:10 AM
http://gunowners.org/gingrich-mixed-record.htm

We have gun free school zones thanks to newt. Those on this board that believe he is a friend of the 2a in any way, shape or form are highly mistaken or naive. I won't get into Newt's problems in other areas, but based on the 2A, newt is horrible, horrible, horrible. Frankly, he's worse than most democrats in congress and the fact that he lies outright about this is just the icing on the cake.

Folks, don't be duped by the newt - he's a professional con artist.

razorback2003
December 7, 2011, 11:04 AM
Wasn't Newt Speaker of the House when the 'Assault Weapon Ban' was passed? What was his vote/position at that time?

alsaqr
December 7, 2011, 11:46 AM
Newt may be the lesser of two evils. i will vote for no evil, lesser or otherwise. Newt will not have my vote.

Dr.Mall Ninja
December 7, 2011, 12:36 PM
Newt Voted against tbe "Assualt Rifle" Ban and then tried to repeal it http://articles.nydailynews.com/1995-12-05/news/17975015_1_assault-weapons-weapons-ban-newt-gingrich

While Ron Paul is a little bit stronger on the 2A, he has some other views that I think are insane!(I wont go in to them due to the forum rules)

With Gingrich in the white house we will have a pro gun president, if Ron Paul runs third Party we are going to be facing a Barak Obama who does not have to worry about reelection.

esquare
December 7, 2011, 12:50 PM
With Gingrich in the white house we will have a pro gun president

No, with Gingrich in the white house, we will have a seemingly pro-gun president that may very well sign an anti-gun bill if he thinks it would benefit him in any way.

henschman
December 7, 2011, 02:02 PM
No, with Gingrich in the white house, we will have a seemingly pro-gun president that may very well sign an anti-gun bill if he thinks it would benefit him in any way.

Or if he thinks it is "reasonable" gun control like forever barring people from possessing firearms because a judge issued a restraining order against them (which judges give out dime a dozen); or making it a federal felony with mandatory prison time to possess a firearm within 1000 feet of a school, even if you're just driving by on a public street and have a gun in your trunk; or requiring people to give their fingerprints when they buy guns. If he thinks those things are "reasonable gun control," it scares me to think what else he might think is "reasonable."

As far as Ron Paul goes, people who don't want to see him elected keep repeating the line that he won't be able to win, but yet his numbers just keep going up and up in the polls, after all the establishment media hacks proclaim time and again that he has reached his ceiling of support. The latest polls show him in 2nd place in Iowa, ahead of Romney. If anyone else hit 2nd place the media would treat them as a serious contender; but even if Paul hits first he will continue to be ignored and labeled "unelectable" or whatever else they come up with by the press, because he is such a threat to their beloved establishment. There is truly no one else in modern politics that inspires such venomous hatred from the establishment, whether it is in the media or in the establishment circles of both parties. Who a man's enemies are tells you as much about him as who his friends are.

Sure Gingrich wouldn't be as anti-gun as Obama; but "better than Obama" isn't the standard I am going by when selecting who to support in the GOP primary. I just can't see supporting a guy with such a mixed record when there is someone who is so much better. I mean who would you rather have -- a guy who believes in "reasonable" gun control, or a guy who thinks that NO federal gun control is "reasonable," and wants to repeal it all?

Paladin7
December 7, 2011, 03:26 PM
Personally, I don't think Newt is very consistent on 2A...best bet would be to follow his historical voting record on project vote smart to tell the tale.

As to Ron Paul, I cannot vote for him because of his Foreign Policy. Sorry, but anyone who says America was responsible for 9/11 and mimicks George McGovern's foreign policy is a NO GO for me.

I'm voting for true movement conservatives in this primary, ie. Bachman or Santorum. If they lose, I will vote for anyone against Obama.

bigfatdave
December 7, 2011, 03:34 PM
I believe any of the GOP candidates now running will be a much safer bet.THAT'S a good way to get the GOP to field good candidates!
If you keep voting for the turd sandwiches the GOP puts up, they will just keep putting up their turd sandwiches as candidates.

henschman
December 7, 2011, 03:51 PM
THAT'S a good way to get the GOP to field good candidates!
If you keep voting for the turd sandwiches the GOP puts up, they will just keep putting up their turd sandwiches as candidates.

So true. Some people only think as far forward as the next election. We need to be thinking long-term, and we need to recognize where we will end up if we keep voting for the "lesser evil." At some point the GOP base has to cut its losses and make it clear that flip-flopping RINOs are UNELECTABLE in this party, even if it means taking a couple of elections on the chin in the near term because we abstain from voting for our party's turdburger nominee in the general election. When you are caught in a destructive cycle, it is HARD and PAINFUL to break the cycle, but ultimately it is better for you in the end than if you stayed in the slow spiral toward destruction.

Of course we could eliminate the hard decision of whether or not to vote for the turdburger if we would just nominate a principled individual as our candidate. For me it's either that, or abstaining.

Twmaster
December 7, 2011, 03:59 PM
Of course we could eliminate the hard decision of whether or not to vote for the turdburger if we would just nominate a principled individual as our candidate. For me it's either that, or abstaining.

This.

I have not cast my vote for President in a few cycles. I'm not excited by any of the candidates offered by any party recently. Rather than throwing my vote away on a choice between the least evil of two lessers I'll just keep my vote until somebody worthy comes along.

Newt is not in my opinion as strong a 2A supporter has some of you think he is.

KodiakBeer
December 7, 2011, 04:38 PM
I'm voting for true movement conservatives in this primary, ie. Bachman or Santorum. If they lose, I will vote for anyone against Obama.

Santorum? The same Santorum that has stood with Boxer, Lautenberg and Feinstein on most of the anti-gun legislation over the last 20 years?

One of the questions asked whether or not the candidate would “sign or veto legislation to remove the so-called ‘gun free school zones’ ban.”

Senator Santorum said that he would veto this legislation – thereby continuing the legislative regulations that have created hundreds of thousands of “victim zones” across the country.

On November 10, 1993, Senator Santorum voted to approve the NICS Act. This federal law began the national program to mandate background checks for most all gun sales.


On July, 28, 2005, Senator Santorum stood with incredibly anti-gun politicians like Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, and Frank Lautenberg to mandate trigger locks on the transfer of all handguns.


http://stevedeace.com/news/iowa-politics/iowa-gun-owners-calls-out-two-gop-candidates/

Peace Frog
December 7, 2011, 04:50 PM
Newt is not a true friend of gun owners. I don't trust him at all!

RonPaul 2012

lobo9er
December 7, 2011, 05:27 PM
Better, or as good a question is how Newt feels about the UN. UN is a big theat to 2A.

essayons21
December 7, 2011, 06:19 PM
A fairly recent, short interview with him on the subject.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2011/nov/4/miller-newt-gingrich-dc-deliberately-undermining-s/

Take what you will from his past voting record. He is a politician, and what would be considered a politicially pro-2A vote in the early-90s would be considered anti-2A in todays political climate. Times have changed.

I like the bit about him saying the 2A simply affirms a pre-existing right, gun ownership is not a privilege granted by the government.

Oh and if you haven't read the "Emily gets her gun" series, get to it.

BaltimoreBoy
December 7, 2011, 06:21 PM
Don't waste a vote on anyone whom you don't trust implicitly to do the right thing.

Doing so is the reason that the country is in the pickle it is in.

Better than 'so and so', not as likely to double-cross us as 'so and so' is just not good enough.

Pilot
December 7, 2011, 06:31 PM
Watch what a politicians DOES, not what he/she says.

mljdeckard
December 7, 2011, 09:38 PM
Every vote that is either abstained from or voted for the underdog out of principle is a vote Obama doesn't have to overcome.

orionengnr
December 7, 2011, 10:59 PM
I have not cast my vote for President in a few cycles. I'm not excited by any of the candidates offered by any party recently. Rather than throwing my vote away on a choice between the least evil of two lessers I'll just keep my vote until somebody worthy comes along.
How's that working out for you?

I learned my lesson in '92, when I stood on principle and voted for Ross Perot, along with about 20% of the electorate. Where did that get us? Well, eight years of Bill Clinton.

Elections have consequences, and even if you refuse to decide, you still have made a choice. Or more accurately, you allow others to make the choice for you. And they will.

Everyone who "sat out" the last election because they didn't get the nominee they wanted helped elect BHO. Do you want to repeat that mistake, and subject this Country to Four More years of that?

If you are okay with that, I guess I have nothing left to say.

It is all well and good to be principled. But when you go "all or nothing", more often than not, you end up with nothing.

Newt is not "my guy". But if I don't get my way, I will not have a tantrum and sit in the corner.

I will vote for ABO (anybody but Obama), because that is what the situation demands.

YMMV, and God help us all.

DLEJones
December 8, 2011, 05:23 AM
Listen, whomever goes against Obama, gets my vote. Congress and the House need overhauled too with people of the moral stature of Daniel Boone. We need to stop picking nits and start by getting those that would sign over our rights to the UN replaced with our votes for those that stand for our freedom.

hso
December 8, 2011, 09:46 AM
For the Ron Paul enthusiasts, we've repeatedly asked in other threads that you respect the other members discussing OP's politician's 2A qualifications as they've respected the Ron Paul thread and not hijack the discussion. Your passion for your candidate does not warrant muddying the waters in this thread.

I've done some pruning to try to focus the thread on the original topic.

langenc
December 8, 2011, 10:44 AM
Dont get suckered by Newt!! He is one of several that will not return a questioneer about his 2A positions to gun groups. He also lauded the greatness of the 'infamous' Lautenberg Amendment that has taken thousands of individuals rights-without a trial and no way to reverse once in place. Be accused and your guns are gone--forever.

The following is from just above #29...and is a main reason why we are in the position we are--Except for once-I havre never voted for a president--just voted against someone and this time wontr be any different-itstrongly appears. Wish we could get the media out of elections!!

""Listen, whomever goes against Obama, gets my vote. Congress and the House need overhauled too with people of the moral stature of Daniel Boone. We need to stop picking nits and start by getting those that would sign over our rights to the UN replaced with our votes for those that stand for our freedom.""


HOLD YOUR NOSE AND VOTE-OR NOT!!


Out of 330 million are these 8 or 10 the best we can do?? Shame on us!

henschman
December 8, 2011, 12:55 PM
Everyone who "sat out" the last election because they didn't get the nominee they wanted helped elect BHO. Do you want to repeat that mistake, and subject this Country to Four More years of that?

You are only thinking as far ahead as the next 4 years. I am thinking about the future of our party, and therefore our country. Continuing to vote for bad candidates when they are the party's nominee ensures that nothing ever changes with the party. In the long run it leads to our destruction, just the same as what happens if the other side wins. At some point you just have to say "NO" and refuse to vote for those who don't share your basic principles.

And like it or not, a lot of us Repubs WILL sit out the next election if we don't get a decent candidate. So the question is do YOU want to subject our country to another 4 years of BHO by supporting a candidate that will not win the general election due to the fact that a significant part of his own party's base wouldn't vote for him?

Dr.Mall Ninja
December 8, 2011, 01:07 PM
I just feel that by not voting for the strongest RBKA supporter,you are in fact helping the anti movement. At this point in the primary go ahead and by all means vote for you think is best. When the general election arrives, staying home does not help RBKA at all.

JWF III
December 8, 2011, 10:41 PM
After reading many of the posts in this thread, I'll stand by something I said several months ago... Get ready for 4 more years.:banghead:

As much as I hate to say it, I'd even vote for Slick Willie over what we now have. BHO, in a second (lame duck) term, is capable of doing anything. Both legal and illegal. If he does get 4 more years, we'll end up stepping way back in 2A rights. Even when he takes illegal actions to reach his agenda, it'd takes decades to straighten it out in court. (More F&F anyone?)

A vote is a lot like a gun. Not using your vote is a lot like standing by, watching a loved one being assalted, and not using you CCW to do something about it.

Wyman

kozak6
December 9, 2011, 05:23 AM
Newt is only nominally pro gun, and only if it's convenient. Don't expect anything more.

Obama clearly doesn't like guns, but I don't think he hates them enough to do anything about it. Any anti gun moves would hurt the Democratic Party as a whole, and they can't really afford that.

Ash
December 9, 2011, 06:50 AM
Unwilling to do anything? Fast and Furious was staged for the reason to add weight to new laws (in the short term, it was to aid in requiring Federal notification of multiple long-gun purchases as per the memo on CBS). This was perhaps one of those operations that Obama promised was "under the radar." Obama's ATF was willing to play with the lives of hundreds - causing many deaths so far - for the sake of undermining our rights.

Dr.Mall Ninja
December 9, 2011, 09:12 AM
Kozak BHO wont care as much in his second term. He wont have to worry about his reelection and there is a chance that all our 08 fears will come true.

Quick Shot xMLx
December 9, 2011, 12:00 PM
If Obummer wins in 2012 by the time he's done we'll be praying all he had done was reenact the Assault Weapons Ban. Get ready for Chicago style "common" sense gun laws.

Newt Gingrich is a political whore who will do whatever he thinks is best for himself.

vaherder
December 9, 2011, 12:33 PM
When this bubba first entered politics he called himslef a Rockfeller Republican.
After Nelson Rockfeller and I dont think he was talking about meeting his maker the way Nelson Rockfeller did. There are two professions that dont make good presidents lawyers and professors see Woodrow Wilson and Obama, Lincoln, FDR etc.

Now Newt has a long history of questionable judgment he has only changed his religion three times and his spouses about the same number of times. He is against lobbyist but took over a million dollars from Freddie Mac as a lobbyist. Sorry Newt dont care what you call it hoss you were a loobbyist. So to believe anything this punk says on 2A and gun control is highly suspect.
Newt would sell his wife, get a sex change operation and seize every firearm in this country if it meant getting elected prez. Its all about ego with Newt.

I would almost vote for the lawyer currently in the WH beofre I voted for lying, decietful egotistical scumbag like Newt. Give me Palin, Bachman or Perry over Newt anyday. One other issue with Newt is his age and ask him about his health! And Ron Paul is an isolationist fool who doesn't understand
National Security Policy, Foreign Policy and Monetary Policy. He would make a great ambassdor to Iran and maybe they will keep the nutjob for next decade or so.

BTW the way I hope when the good Lord call me to Heaven I go doing what Nelson Rockfeller was doing and at his age too.

KodiakBeer
December 9, 2011, 12:43 PM
Unless one of the Republican nominees steps in front of the MSNBC media bus, the choices are going to be Romney or Gingrich to run against Obama.

Newt is erratic on the issue, but Romney is firmly anti-gun.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think we're going to see another lesser-of-two-evils election. We should be used to that by now...

Cosmoline
December 9, 2011, 12:48 PM
I do not feel secure voting for him with his record on gun control, particularly given his track record on other matters. By the time he was ousted, nobody trusted him.

borrowedtime69
December 9, 2011, 01:04 PM
i sincerly hope that newt doesnt get the nomination. i dont trust him to stay the coarse. he has sided with the clintons and with pelosi on different liberal causes. he came out and said he didnt know what he was thinking when he did that. if he does things like that without thinking, why would i want him in charge of my gun rights?? plus, he has other issues that make him less than palatable.

razorback2003
December 9, 2011, 01:27 PM
Newt is unpredictable. Barack is at least predictable, though I do not agree with him.

stonecutter2
December 9, 2011, 01:32 PM
If Obummer wins in 2012 by the time he's done we'll be praying all he had done was reenact the Assault Weapons Ban. Get ready for Chicago style "common" sense gun laws.

Newt Gingrich is a political whore who will do whatever he thinks is best for himself.
I have serious doubts anything of this magnitude would happen if Obama got reelected. The Chicago gun laws (and Illinois) have been and are being challenged.

To be quite honest, I'm doing my best to educate from within the Democratic party. I am registered Democrat, but I am not a party line voter. I vote based on candidate stances on several issues, their responsiveness to my communications and how they address my concerns, and of course based on how I "feel" about them.

I don't think it's worth a panic if Obama gets reelected. His 2008 election was a non-event, I suspect the same if a reelection occurs.

Sky
December 9, 2011, 01:34 PM
There are many things that can be admired about Newt as a thinker/speaker and historian.

I am with the crowd that does not trust him as far as our sovereign nation goes. I am getting more and more dissatisfied with any institution who sees Al-Qaeda behind every bush so our individual liberties can be taken from us.

I am not big on sanctified water boarding ( been there done that it is not nice and the results are poor at best; guy can be puking and crying for his momma and still lying) especially since the passage of S-1867.

Like many if you want the same old stuff, vote for the same old politicians, with their same old agenda that they spout for votes; great sound bites.

I am more concerned with the president who nominates the next supreme court justice and someone who understands and is willing to support the founders ideas of the Constitution.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=4&sqi=2&ved=0CFAQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.issues2000.org%2F2012%2FNewt_Gingrich_Gun_Control.htm&ei=01LiTv6ZBeLk0QGW54SLBQ&usg=AFQjCNFjNOs8UxzOQ2B7mBPmAE4ZcJ9KQw&sig2=TbGw2v3w06c93GR4107xww Newt's published positions......

Don’t redefine Constitution with no individual right to arms


Over the last 50 years the Supreme Court has become a permanent constitutional convention in which the whims of five appointed lawyers have rewritten the meaning of the Constitution. Under this new, all-powerful model of the Court--and by extension the trail-breaking 9th Circuit Court--the Constitution and the law can be redefined, unchecked, by federal judges.
Anyone who thinks various Supreme Court decisions are not adequately worrisome need only look at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to see how domination by secular Left-liberal judges will change America. It is hard to imagine that one court could be so out of step with the views of the vast majority of the American people. And it is unforgivable that this destructive pattern could have been going on for a generation without an effective challenge.


Newt could be a great candidate but he has so many things in his closet that will come to light if he is the nominee we will just have to see if the voting public can accept him over President Obama.

Iowa is going to be closer than many have been lead to expect.

Dr.Mall Ninja
December 9, 2011, 01:36 PM
The Chicago gun laws (and Illinois) have been and are being challenged.
What kind of judges does Obama like to appoint?
With a guy like Gingrich we will be getting more like Roberts and Alito. When defending the Constitution a pro RBKA supreme court is critical.

alsaqr
December 9, 2011, 04:56 PM
With a guy like Gingrich we will be getting more like Roberts and Alito. When defending the Constitution a pro RBKA supreme court is critical.

Roberts, Alito and three other SCOTUS judges gave us a luke warm ruling on the Second Amendment; nothing more. Before the SCOTUS ruling you could not get a gun permit in DC. Good luck getting a carry permit in DC today.

SCOTUS recently denied cert in two Second Amendment cases.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/1128/Supreme-Court-declines-to-clarify-gun-rights-question

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/williams-v-maryland/



.

essayons21
December 9, 2011, 08:35 PM
Its all about ego with Newt

Is there any politician for which this statement is not true? It's the nature of the beast.

Gone are the days of men being thrust into the presidency by popular acclaim. Nowadays, anyone who has the ego and the lust for power necessary to pursue the presidency should automatically be disqualified for the position.

Refusing to vote because you refuse to choose between the lesser of two evils is idealistic nonsense. A lame duck term with BHO could dismantle many of the 2A advances made in the past decade.

alsaqr
December 9, 2011, 10:33 PM
Twice in my lifetime i have defended my family and my home with gunfire. i could care less that the pro-gun candidate is a Baptist preacher in the mold of John Brown or a Lesbian Wiccan whos had two abortions. The pro-gunner get my vote every time.

Given a choice between Gingrich and Obama i will write in a vote for Charles Manson.

tnxdshooter
December 9, 2011, 10:53 PM
IMHO Newt is the candidate that is best suited to the job.

Ha, your right, he is an immoral womanizer, pathological liar, horrible human being, etc. He is perfect for president. He has all those aforementioned traits we look for in our presidents.

Sent from Droid Incredible on Verizon Wireless

alsaqr
December 9, 2011, 10:57 PM
A lame duck term with BHO could dismantle many of the 2A advances made in the past decade.

Presidents do not make draconian gun control laws. Presidents sign draconian gun control bills into law after they are passed by scurrilous congressmen like Gingrich.

Super Sneaky Steve
December 9, 2011, 11:47 PM
Looks like Newt's support of the Brady Bill and the Lautenberg rifle ban has already been stated here. He's a terrible flip flopper. Did you guys know he's not even on the ballot in two key states? That would be Missouri and Ohio. He's not serious.

The DesMoines Register has a great article on him for your viewing pleasure.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20111209/OPINION01/312090025/-1/gallery_array/Rand-Paul-Republicans-would-take-giant-step-backward-by-choosing-Gingrich

And to those who said Ron Paul has a "crazy" foreign policy, I guess having a strong national defense and following the constitution when we go to war is "crazy".

Those founding fathers must have been a bunch of crazies too.

exavid
December 10, 2011, 01:09 AM
Ron Paul has some good points, Newt has some as does most of the people running for the Republican nomination. The only thing I do know for is that those who sit out the election will get the president they deserve. We do know what Obama is like and what he wants to do. We do know his position on the Second Amendment. If he is re-elected you can bet the gloves will be off and you can expect attacks on the 2A from every possible angle, through new Supreme Court judges, Executive orders, Presidential findings and all those extra Constitutional maneuverings he's already done. 2012 is an election that's actually going to be one of the most important elections in the past century. This time it really will be. So better think twice about pulling your punch, or your vote on this one.

punkndisorderly
December 10, 2011, 09:01 AM
It amazes me that the current crop of Republican candidates is so horrible. It's like they're trying to lose. The party elite is as clueless as the Dem's.

None of them are strong on 2nd amendment, illegal immigration, and the economy. The two supposed front runners are weak on all 3. Perry and Paul are weak on immigration, at a minimum. Paul is the only one who seems to have any integrity.

Sadly, as long as people keep voting for clowns, Washington will continue to be a 3lot ring circus.

alsaqr
December 10, 2011, 10:01 AM
Sadly, as long as people keep voting for clowns, Washington will continue to be a 3lot ring circus.

+1
Yep, that happened because folks voted for evil. It will not stop until voters insist their partys candidate not be evil.

FROGO207
December 10, 2011, 10:08 AM
I am no fan of any of the choices either red or blue as we see them today. :banghead: It is the same drivel and they all are basically disconnected from the average citizen. Newt is a flip-flopper running with the heard IMHO. The two party system is majorly broken today. If we can get a third party in serious contention then the other two will have to man up and represent the citizen or loose its political power. Not voting is a horrible thing IMHO. I will not stand by and let others decide what I can do without a fight. Now voting to stop a Dem takeover did not really work last time either I am afraid. Ron Paul may not be ideal but at the present time he sounds better than Newt and his cronies or any Dem choice to me. Obama may have been right about a CHANGE after all, it may just not be HIS brand of change we need.:cool: Next election is the time to really look at our RKBA rights and vote your conscience in ALL areas. Well the world is supposed to end in 2012 anyway.:banghead:

Bottom line I do not trust Newt at all.

george29
December 10, 2011, 01:57 PM
I'm so tired of politicians and politics. I'm turning 50 this year, I know some things and know enough to know that I won't ever know everything. This much I know; President Obama is charming, charismatic, well spoken and even regal, but he is opposed to the America we grew up with, he is opposed to small government and small business, he is opposed to a republic and he is opposed to anything but a socialist theocracy thinly disguised as a socialist democracy (which inessence we already have). President Obama has no respect for the constitution but prefers to enact laws that are passed by a congress and senate that have no contact with their constituents, the Health Care Law proves this for todays politicians just as the Patriot Act enacted by the Bush administration proved that these same politicians wanted more power back then as well.
For me it has come down to one issue and one issue alone; who will respect the 2a more, President Obama or the Republican candidate. I Don't Know! I assume though that with their love for all things international, the Democratic Party and it's political representation will be far worse than a corrupt Republican President. So my personal choice will be anyone but a Democrat!

brickeyee
December 10, 2011, 07:48 PM
I have not cast my vote for President in a few cycles.

That is how people like Obongo get elected.

Is it THAT hard to vote?:banghead:

marv
December 10, 2011, 09:42 PM
I decided a few elections ago that Newt was the most dangerous man in American politics at the time. Nothing much has happened since then to change my mind.

dc.fireman
December 10, 2011, 10:35 PM
Watch what a politicians DOES, not what he/she says.
Best answer, ever.

benEzra
December 11, 2011, 09:39 AM
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that during the 1994 brouhaha over the Feinstein AWB, Gingrich could have killed the ban in conference committee and chose not to do so. If that's the case, I imagine that he foresaw that he and the GOP could use the backlash to their political benefit. I am pretty sure that Newt would support another AWB if it seemed politically beneficial to do so.

To keep this gun-related, I won't get into the issues I have with Gingrich re: the rest of the Bill of Rights.

As to the question of SCOTUS nominees---based on Gingrich's publicly stated views on crime and punishment, I'm not sure that Gingrich wouldn't lean toward the tough-on-crime, harsh-sentencing, former-prosecutor type, in the mold of Bush I appointee David Souter, rather than a civil libertarian. Souter was one of the most anti-2ndA justices to ever sit on the Court.

george29
December 11, 2011, 12:23 PM
What a conundrum this country is in.

george29
December 11, 2011, 02:39 PM
The choice is simple, if you don't cast a vote for Obama's opposer then you cast a vote for Obama, that's how simple it is. If you don't vote you don't have the right to complain. Obama/Biden/Hilary are all internationalist who will allow the UN their wish to outlaw the 2A, I doubt Newt will be that bad and I am by no means a Newt fan but Obama got rid of his only real threat (Cain) which leave us with the LCD (lowest common denominator). I fear Obama is going to win because he already owns 48% of the vote whilst we argue the traits of the Republican candidates. None of the Republican candidates (other than Cain) meet my requirements, does that mean that I should not cast a vote for the candidate that I don't like letting Obama win? I don't know who is the lesser evil but I do know that Mr. Obama becomes a lame duck the minute he wins his second term and this means he will do whatever he didn't in his first term. Vote him out before he can do anything outlandish. At least Newt will be thinking of his second term and we have 4 years to se who he is. Can he be worse than B/B/H (Barack/Biden/Hillary)?
As for Congress/Senate, vote 'em out! Don't let them keep their seats! One term, two at the most, don't let them think it is a family business!

hso
December 11, 2011, 05:46 PM
Since few folks are willing to stay focused on Mr. Gingrich's 2A position and no new information has been presented in a while there's no point in leaving this thread open.

YankeeClipper
December 12, 2011, 07:13 PM
Make Newt answer the gun control question.He was speaker of the house for 10 minuts when he was asked if he was going to repeal the Lottonberg amendment that was promised to the 2nd Amendment voters and his answer was: [And I quote] " We have bigger fish to fry". Not to me Newt: I spent my money and worked for the Republican party to help with the contract with America. No less that 20 time I have asked the question of your staff when they call for money and no one will answer. "Newt just doesn't play well with other others".

If you enjoyed reading about "Newt on Guns." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!