Santorum on guns


PDA






Infringed
January 4, 2012, 12:39 AM
Guess we better take a look at him after his showing in Iowa.

From OnTheIssues (http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Rick_Santorum_Gun_Control.htm):
-Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
-Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004) [Note this bill also provided for a 10yr reauthorization of the AWB]
-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)

Lest anyone think I'm pushing Santorum, I'm a Ron Paul supporter, and will vote for him in the primary, and may vote Libertarian or write-in for Paul in the general election. But I don't know much about Santorum and nothing about where he stands on 2A other than what I pulled up on the OnTheIssues site.

If you enjoyed reading about "Santorum on guns" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
22lr
January 4, 2012, 01:19 AM
Keeping on the track of strictly firearms.......

I like the guys firearms record. I have my reasons for who I support but Romney is the only guy id worry about, and even then he is better than what we have right now. So ya, he has a good record and if this was a one issue election then we would have about a 4 way tie.

Infringed
January 4, 2012, 02:13 AM
On just gun issues, Santorum seems to be alright when compared to the current administration.And a lot better than Romney, if the OnTheIssues site is accurate about Santorum's 2A-related voting.

AlexanderA
January 4, 2012, 09:30 AM
Moot point on Santorum. Despite his showing in Iowa, he won't be nominated unless the Republicans want to throw away their chance to defeat Obama. I don't think the Republicans are that suicidal. (Just wait until all the negative stuff comes out against Santorum next week.)

rbernie
January 4, 2012, 09:42 AM
If your post disappreared, that's because it failed the 'keep it focused on the RKBA' litmus test. Per the forum rules, we do not do politics. We do guns and RKBA.

calaverasslim
January 4, 2012, 09:47 AM
Don't know Santorum, but wouldn't trust Romney any further than I can throw him when it comes to gun rights. He is a Mass. politician and I suspect has a bad track record on thois matter

JFrame
January 4, 2012, 09:57 AM
Unless a president is going to pass legislation by Executive Order, it seems like the only way he'll tackle any gun control legislation is what gets passed to him by Congress.

I can't imagine any GOP president committing political suicide by enacting gun control laws by EO.

So it seems to behoove us to ensure that we get as many conservative senators and congressmen elected as possible, so that no president is faced with having to make such decisions.

But without delving further into Santorum's record -- Yes, I like what I see of his voting record as posted by the OP...


.

PRM
January 4, 2012, 09:58 AM
Disappearing Posts ~ that's new. I figured the lock was already closing on this thread.

+1 rbernie

Pilot
January 4, 2012, 10:02 AM
I know Rick personally, and have since he was a PA Senate staffer in the 80's. He is solid on RKBA, and one of the more conservative, and 2A supporting candidates on the ballot. What you see is what you get.

hso
January 4, 2012, 10:15 AM
For some the criteria is electability for picking a candidate and for others it is "anybody but..." and for some it is issues/record.

Santorum's position and record on RKBA is what is relevant in this discussion in this thread. Please stay focused on that.

After Iowa comes further tests of the various candidates and their records, stance on issues and "electability". We'll see how the public views them.

Infringed
January 4, 2012, 10:57 AM
Moot point on Santorum. Despite his showing in Iowa, he won't be nominated unless the Republicans want to throw away their chance to defeat Obama. I don't think the Republicans are that suicidal. (Just wait until all the negative stuff comes out against Santorum next week.)I agree that Santorum will fade once the attacks come hard and fast.

But it seems to me that Romney is unelectable. His finishes in the 2008 primaries and again last night suggest that there is a pretty firm cap on his appeal to conservatives.

And with Perry and Bachmann dropping out, where do those votes go? Probably not Romney to any large degree, and likely spread amongst the remaining candidates. If he wins the nomination by a bare plurality, will the conservatives rally around him to beat Obama? I don't think so as he has disaffected too many groups within the conservative base, including gun owners. And once he gets the nomination, he will be moving left of where he talks during his primary campaign, which will further alienate conservative voters.

I think we had all better focus on making sure pro-2A senators and congressmen, and state legislators and governors, win in 2012, because BHO is likely getting another 4 years.

gilfo
January 4, 2012, 11:04 AM
Maybe we all should be more concerned about the direction this country is going under the Obama admin then who is going to be best for our gun rights. We need the best most electable candidate to go up against Obama and get this country back on it's feet, then let's worry about who's good for US the gun owners. <...> Just because a candidate is good on gun rights does not make him the "right person" for the job of president of America

lobo9er
January 4, 2012, 11:50 AM
i think I heard today santorum supported the UN's small arms disarmament program. I had radio on while working and missed some of the story so might be a good thing to check on.

*I'm not sayiong he does for sure.

Sam1911
January 4, 2012, 12:04 PM
i think I heard today santorum supported the UN's small arms disarmament program.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp

And military small arms issued since at least 60 years ago are completely illegal to import into this country for sale to the citizens anyway, and have been since 1968.

The UN treaty, if it ever does come to something, isn't aimed at our privately owned firearms -- even our semi-auto AKM copies. It is aimed at some of the things nations (like our own country from time to time) do with their vast stockpiles of military arms like arming guerrilla forces, paramilitary groups, sick freaks like the LRA, "resistance fighters," "contras," "rebels," "freedom fighters," "insurgents," etc., etc.

Now, whether you believe that the proliferation of small arms to people who want/need/can afford them across the world is a good or bad thing, and whether you believe that the UN should be trying to create an enforceable policy against it, is a whole 'nother question and must remain outside the scope of THR.

It is, however, interesting food for thought as we consider Heinlein's old adage about an armed society being a polite one.

Sam1911
January 4, 2012, 01:19 PM
Looks like the warnings are too difficult to heed.

THR does GUNS. If you have opinions about politicians that don't relate directly to their stance on RKBA, save them for somewhere else.

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