As for your issue of concern, I know you don't like the NRA, but here is their summary of Allen's possition on the Assault Weapons Ban.
Campaigning for the Senate four years ago, former Virginia Gov. George Allen stated he favored keeping in place the federal semi-auto ban, saying his goal in "fighting criminals was to enforce, not repeal, existing laws."After studying the issue, Sen. Allen came to the conclusion that: "The simple fact is the Assault Weapons Ban only attacks the cosmetic features of a gun, banning some guns even though they function exactly the same as hundreds of other semi-automatic firearms."
He noted that, "In Virginia we have seen that incarcerating violent felons is the best crime reduction policy. I still believe our focus should be on criminals, not guns, and it should be on programs that work, like Project Exile and the Abolition of Parole."
Sen. Allen also expressed his concern "that reauthorizing this gun ban legislation will serve as a platform, inviting added restrictions on Second Amendment rights. The current law, then, only makes sense if the ultimate goal it is to ban more and more guns in the future, something I cannot support. This can be seen in several proposals that permanently ban a large number of guns that citizens lawfully use for competition, hunting or self defense."
If you study George Allen, you will realize that he has been completely consistent on this. He has always believed in enforcing the laws on the books. Lock away the criminals. He, along with our next Governor Jerry Kilgore, abolished parole in Virginia. He's not about taking away guns. He's about locking away those that use them illegally...and throwing away the key.
And here's the distintion with George Allen - Don't miss this - he studied the law and took a look at whether or not it was effective. And he determined it was not.
And that's the difference. When George Allen votes one way or the other, it's because he's read and he understands the issue. He does not depend on his staff to make his decisions.
FINALLY, the question in 2000 was hypothetical, what would you do? He was not yet in the Senate.
When it came up for a vote what did he DO?
And, if nothing else convinces you, take a look at how he pissed off the gun grabbers.
Anyone that does something to piss off gun-grabbers is A-OK in my book...........not that I had anything against Sen. Allen to begin with.
I appreciate a legislator (on any level) that will actually study an issue to make an informed decision on said issue........And how can one not have respect for someone that will state, with knowlege, why they have made a particular decision, even if it means having changed a previous position. I don't call that flip-flopping, I call it guts.
Yeah, that is all fine and good... but when he ran for Senate, he took a pro ban stance... then flip flopped when pressure started mounting on him.
Trust me, I know better than to take anything to the bank. I've been screwed over by politicians too many times. That is why I work for people like Dick Black and not people like Russ Potts or Tom Rust. If Allen want's the support of the thousands of people like me, he needs to start proving himself and not only voting for pro gun stuff, but introduce legislation... real strong legislation. There is a lot of stuff he could do but hasn't.
Mike
Uh oh...yer sounding like a shill, dude...it's still three (3) years away...MUD