RIP actor Lane Smith
Posted on 04/03/2011 7:07:04 PM PDT by Blue Collar Christian
Idaho: Campus Carry Legislation Defeated Because Three “Pro-Gun” Legislators Voted “No”
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Last Friday, the Senate State Affairs Committee voted to effectively defeat House Bill 222 by a 3 to 6 vote. This unfortunate outcome happened because three incumbents, who were previously A-rated and endorsed by the NRA Political Victory Fund in 2010, broke their promise on this issue.
All three Senators -- Brent Hill, John McGee and Chuck Winder -- indicated in their responses to our 2010 candidate questionnaire, that they would support this self-defense legislation. Our ratings and endorsements of them last year were based on their responses to our state candidate questionnaire as well as their previous legislative voting records.
This important self-defense legislation would have allowed for the lawful carry of a firearm on a college or university campus for self-defense, as long as the individual is not restricted from legally carrying a firearm by any state or federal law. While this bill would also grant authority to a college and university to restrict firearms in undergraduate housing, its opponents argued that law-abiding permit holders cannot be trusted to carry a firearm on campus.
Below are the names and contact information for these three state Senators. Contact them TODAY and let them know how disappointed you are that they did not stand up for gun owners and the Constitution.
Senate State Affairs Committee:
Senator Brent Hill (R-34)
BHill@senate.idaho.gov
(208) 332-1300
Senator John McGee (R-10)
JMcGee@senate.idaho.gov
(208) 332-1304
Senator Chuck Winder (R-14)
CWinder@senate.idaho.gov
(208) 332-1354
Republicans, and yes.
Ah, yes. The NRA picks a few more “winners.”
GOA.
Well that will make it easier for those who don’t obey the law to shoot up the place knowing nobody can defend themselves; who wants to bet that if someone did conceal and shot the bad guy would be brought up on charges.
They just run off and vote like dems once they're in office.
We must show them our “appreciation”.
Soon.
I can’t say that I necessarily disagree with them. I’m pro-gun, but my memory of college is essentially one of an alcohol fueled orgy. I have very mixed feelings about allowing campus carry.
RIP actor Lane Smith
“feelings”?
SHEESH!
Use facts, not feelings to make decisions. Yours, and others, “feelings” can prohibit freedom?
I've noticed, since I started paying any sort of attention to politics [I'm under 30], that the Republican Party, as a party, does not strive for any of the stated party planks. The Republican party is the party which says it will do something and, when elected, does nothing; a prime example is that of firearms, Republicans get a lot of credit for the Assault Weapon Ban... but they do not deserve it: the AWB had a sunset clause and terminated because of it. This means that the republicans had to do nothing to terminate it, literally.
The same is true of the stated goal of overturning Roe v. Wade; when was the last time that the Congress did something to REALLY impact the number of abortions? This serious talk of eliminating funding for Planned Parenthood is the most they've ever done [in my memory]. {President Bush's Mexico City policy doesn't count: that's a person's doing, not the party's.}
If the Republican Party doesn't grow a pair, especially considering the massive turnaround of the 2010 elections, and actually do the things it says that it will do... well, in that case I have no use for the party at all.
[If the Republican Party doesn’t grow a pair, especially considering the massive turnaround of the 2010 elections, and actually do the things it says that it will do... well, in that case I have no use for the party at all.]
You’re one savvy youngster. The left calls the
Republicans the Party of NO, but they are the party of NOthing.
...you do realize that until 50 years ago [or so] people regularly had firearms at their immediate disposal in universities, right?
How common were university shootings?
In fact, let me rephrase it: how many school shootings were there at all levels of school from 1776 to 1976 [200 years] compared to how many UNIVERSITY shootings there have been in the past 20 years [1990-2010]?
Thank you much.
The left calls the Republicans the Party of NO, but they are the party of NOthing.
Here's something they could do: link.
(It's my if I were governor... plan.)
You and Davey Crockett. I shouldn’t have opened Pandora’s box...
You might not be aware of this, but “mixed feelings” is a common idiom in the English language to describe uncertainty. It does not necessarily denote emotive thinking or emotion at all. In case you didn’t know, and by your reply, I’m assuming you did not, an idiom is defined as a word or phrase that has a figurative definition that differs from it’s literal translation.
It’s a shame that I have to explain this to a FReeper.
I wasn't around then, so no, I really wasn't aware of it.
In fact, let me rephrase it: how many school shootings were there at all levels of school from 1776 to 1976 [200 years] compared to how many UNIVERSITY shootings there have been in the past 20 years [1990-2010]?
Well, I do know that culturally we aren't the same society that we were in 1776, or even 1876, so that does little to assuage my misgivings. Note; misgivings. I've come down on neither side of this issue, but merely relayed that I am torn on the issue.
>You and Davey Crockett. I shouldn’t have opened Pandora’s box...
What’s this about Davy Crockett?
You and he being folk heroes and all...
I agree...however do not believe that they will grow a pair. I also continue to worry just how truely hopped up on the job the new Tea-Party canidates are.
>You and he being folk heroes and all...
Wait... I’m a folk-hero? When did that happen?
— LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.