Posted on 06/13/2011 8:44:36 AM PDT by Jack Black
Dear Mr. Cain,
Many conservatives have been touting your candidacy for president as cause for great hope that they will be able to support someone who understands limited government and freedom. That’s why your answers to Wolf Blitzer’s questions on gun control (see sidebar video player at 3:04 mark) have raised concerns among right to keep and bear arms advocates.
Specifically, you affirmed your belief that “states or local government [should] be allowed to control guns.” That's the same "home rule" position advocated by the Brady Campaign.
Some in the conservative camp are trying to find excuses for you, telling us not to panic and that you “slipped up a bit.” Some, hopeful for your candidacy, urge us to cut you some slack and give you an opportunity to clarify what you meant.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Typically, convicts are stripped of many rights. However, it is very common practice for ex-convicts to voluntarily appear before a judge to get their rights restored.
Their #1 restoration, by a long chalk, is the right to bear arms, and judges are usually sympathetic to them, unless their crime involved the violent use of a gun. The #2 restoration, which says something, is the return of the right to vote.
This restoration process is very interesting, because it clearly distinguishes rights from privileges. And yet judges may also have input into restoring some privileges, such as an ex-con who wishes a legal name change, because they have a notorious name that will result in further, extra-legal punishment by an unsympathetic public.
In some cases, judges might even agree to seal criminal records, or best of all, to expunge them, so though a federal record of a criminal will still exist, there will be no State record.
Maybe they ought to do a background check before exercising other inalienable Rights. Like going to church on Sundays to only approved Churches and maybe a permit to speak in public...
Of course, if they try and commit a crime using said firearm... Shoot them.
Problem solved. Zero recidivism too...
I don’t hate him.
I am simply going to remove him from my personal list of “viable candidates for whom to consider voting for president in 2012”.
The right to vote, no such right.
I am amazed sometimes when a Presidential candidate is thrown a question about an issue that will certainly come up in the campaign and they act as if they’ve never even thought about it before. Herman Cain relies too much on his black preacher speaking style.
IMHO...
I’m supporting Cain even though he has to tone down his 2nd Amendment support. He the most conservative candidate that is still palatable to Independents and blue dog Dems. And he is conservative “enough” for now.
From the crazy Constitutionalist booby-hatchery... (so I hope no one is offended, I’m one of those 2nd Amendment “loons”)...
As far as the 2nd Amendment, a militia is intended for two times: when the nation’s wacked-out rulers turn the police and army against it’s own citizens (Founders wrote exactly that in personal writings) and for the case of invasion by an enemy force. In both cases, it does best if it is as heavily armed as possible. The 2nd Amendment is NOT about target shooting and hunting. The idea of personal defense from bad guys is not a “militia” item, but it logically goes along for the ride, as arms are nice for personal defense, so the writers of the 2nd Amendment obviously include this in their reasons for writing it.
It does no one any harm if a bazooka sits in the basement.
I have personally known people who would have legally not been able to acquire firearms; I don’t know if they had them, but they Constitutionally have the right.
It’s what they DO with them that’s the issue. If a crime is committed using the weapon, it’s a crime and it is punishable. The laws are there, they just have to be enforced. Everyone crying in the courtroom is told to believe that the murder would not have happened if the bad guy could no get his hands on a firearm because government had confiscated the guns of the citizen militia. But of course, like the printing press, knife and the rock, the gun has been invented and it can’t be uninvented, so the bad guy will always have a gun.
The ownership of the weapon in and of itself hurts no one.
Many people today shy away from buying a firearm precisly because they do not want to register with the government in any way, shape or form. And rightly so. The government has no need to know what weapons anyone owns other than to crash through their door in the middle of the night to confiscate them.
Why did the government never require us to strap a license plate to the a$$ of our horses ? Because it was nonsense and would have required tons of costly paperwork. Nowadays they have computers to make it practical, so we all have to strap a license plate to the a$$ of our car ? When a criminal can just switch plates and completely throw off the law temporarily, enough to commit mayhem. So it prevents no crime, it’s just a revenue source for the state.
As far as the insane, the felons, and the insane felons: if everyone carried a gun, they’d shoot about 1 person before they were dead, problem solved.
IMHO...
A permit requirement is an infringement. And just TRY to get a carry permit here; if you're not connected, darned near impossible.
Yeah, saw that. Painful to watch.
When Cain outlines the big picture, I'm very impressed by what he says. But when he starts to go into details, I'm not so impressed. It seems like he hasn't given the details near enough thought.
Cain is a good solid conservative. If we could just appoint someone, I am confident his instincts would be good and he'd mostly do the right things. The problem is this primary business is about nominating a candidate that can actually win a general election, and Cain just isn't ready for prime time. He gets away with the kind of gaffes he makes on Fox News Sunday and BoR only because no one takes him seriously. If we actually get to a point where he is a real contender and both the MSM and conservative media really start grilling him, he'd self destruct. He's just not anywhere near ready for a serious run at the presidency. Cain needs to suck it up and win a few local and state elections and get some experience as a candidate that can win an actual election.
2. I didn't edit anything, I linked to an article and excerpted the first 3 paragraphs, as the rules don't allow posting the entire article from that site.
3. I found this article on a gun-rights board, and it's by a known gun-rights writer. Seems pretty legit,which is why I posted it.
4. Just because Cain has made one pro-2A statement doesn't mean he's sincerely pro-gun. I could find similar statements from many other politicians who have later voted for "commonsense" gun control.
5.. I am not a liar, but you are a rude name-caller who jumps to conclusions.
Idiot.
My apologies if you were offended. I replied to the article, not the original poster.
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.