Monkeyleg
Member.
One of the people on the WCCA's email list sent me his email to turncoat Democrat Representative Gary Sherman, and Sherman's response. The constituent in question reminded Sherman of what happened to MO Governor Holden in this last election. Here's Sherman's very interesting reply:
Thanks for your message.
I do not agree. First, I believe that my vote reflected the majority of my constituents. Second, concealed carry has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear arms, as the bill itself concedes by setting up a licensing and registration system. We do not license or register rights. Since the NRA supported the bill, and generally opposes all other forms of registration and licensing, I think that is obvious to them, as well.
In general, I have an exceptional 2nd Amendment voting record; far better than my opponent's was, and I think most fair minded people recognize that. Besides, my hunting close fit, because they are mine and not just a political stunt.
Gary
Notice a couple of things. First, Sherman says he based his vote on constituent opinions. Really? Then why did he vote for CCW in 2002, put his name on the concealed carry bill in June of 2003, and vote for it on the assembly floor in November of 2003?
More interestingly, though, is his final justification for voting to sustain the veto. He claims it would require licensing and registration--which the bill would, but only for those who were willing to be licensed and registered. He's effectively saying that he sided with a notoriously anti-gun governor because he was concerned about licensing gun owners.
I'm trying to come up with a THR-friendly word to describe Mr. Sherman. "Cheeky" seems far too mild.
Thanks for your message.
I do not agree. First, I believe that my vote reflected the majority of my constituents. Second, concealed carry has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear arms, as the bill itself concedes by setting up a licensing and registration system. We do not license or register rights. Since the NRA supported the bill, and generally opposes all other forms of registration and licensing, I think that is obvious to them, as well.
In general, I have an exceptional 2nd Amendment voting record; far better than my opponent's was, and I think most fair minded people recognize that. Besides, my hunting close fit, because they are mine and not just a political stunt.
Gary
Notice a couple of things. First, Sherman says he based his vote on constituent opinions. Really? Then why did he vote for CCW in 2002, put his name on the concealed carry bill in June of 2003, and vote for it on the assembly floor in November of 2003?
More interestingly, though, is his final justification for voting to sustain the veto. He claims it would require licensing and registration--which the bill would, but only for those who were willing to be licensed and registered. He's effectively saying that he sided with a notoriously anti-gun governor because he was concerned about licensing gun owners.
I'm trying to come up with a THR-friendly word to describe Mr. Sherman. "Cheeky" seems far too mild.