Oldtimer said:
OVERALL- nationwide- I have no doubt that the majority of the nation supports increased background checks--BUT in a nation that is not Democracy- but a Republic- those voting have to follow the beliefs of those that will re-elect them.......
The whole proposed law is a joke anyway-- so which ever way a person votes means little....
Our Governor in MT vetoed a rightwingernut state bill letting anyone pack a concealed weapon about anywhere they wanted, even anti to local city ordinances--- and in the day or two afterward in talking to concerned firearms owners/ law enforcement/prosecutors-- the majority of them support the Governors action- and Montanas background checks on CCW permitees that gives them a major standing in the reciprocrity issue of the country...
ALL I talked to- believe if you can't pass the states background check and requirements--- maybe you shouldn't be eligible to be packing....... :???: :wink:
Oldtimer they are claiming 85% support :roll: That is a very high number and I'm guessing that the pollsters were not calling anyone in the more central states to come up with the number that supported their agenda. :wink:
Tell us Oldtimer if a US citizen has a Constitutional right to bear arms and has passed the Montana CCW qualification then why should the Governor have a right to limit where they carry said legally owned and carried gun? If communities want to grant gun free zones then that is their choice but this is one man dictating to his citizens what they can and can't do IN HIS STATE. :roll:
TAMMY FAYE-- read it again-- the Governor upheld the current CCW and right to carry-- which also grants communities to give gun free areas...What he turned down was allowing every Tom- Dick - or Harry that had a gun from packing concealed wherever he wanted to without a permit......
This bill was opposed by most firearm owners, CCW permit holders, and sane folks of the state...
Only the radical rightwingernut conspiracists thought they needed it...
And If the State of Montana has a background check system why does the US federal Government need one? Is this not just another attempt of Obama and the Democrats to infringe on the powers of each and every State?
It probably should be left to each state- BUT with the Interstate trade set up we have on production and marketing of firearms/ammo- that won't work....
I see Baucus was smart enough to vote FOR MONTANANs but I don't see Tester's name on the list of those that opposed the bill on behalf of Montana citizens so I hope everyone remembers this come election time.
The whole proposed law is a joke anyway-- so which ever way a person votes means little....
Since you made this comment I have to wonder if you figure the whole bill was a waste of valuable EXPENSIVE time that your hero Obama and the Dems could have used more wisely on passing a budget? But one thing we all have learned (except you Oldtimer) is Obama isn't going to waste a crisis like a school shooting to force his leftwing Constitution infringing agenda down the throats of American citizens.
BTW what do you think of Baucus voting to not uphold the US Constitution and allowing the UN to infringe on the sovereignty of the US and having a say in US Gun Control?
The whole firearm bill is a feel good only thing for those that think more limits on firearms will solve all problems ---- and the UN law does not override the US's sovereignty of gun laws-- UNLESS- they screwed us and the interpreting becomes the same as NAFTA did with affecting sovereignty......... Then maybe we should just invade both Mexico and Canada - and forget about it.... (Personally believe it will eventually have to happen with Mexico anyway)
The problem is-- what we used to get by with by telling folks how to live/what laws to live by doesn't work anymore- unless we follow the same rules/laws....