Skip to comments.Newt Gingrich on Guns: A Mixed Record
Posted on 12/05/2011 3:04:42 PM PST by Outlaw Woman
Prior to the Republican Revolution of 1994, Rep. Newt Gingrich of Georgia had earned an A rating with Gun Owners of America. But that all changed in 1995, after Republicans were swept to power and Gingrich became Speaker of the House.
The Republicans gained the majority, thanks in large part to gun owners outraged by the Clinton gun ban. And upon taking the reins of the House, Speaker Gingrich said famously that, As long as I am Speaker of this House, no gun control legislation is going to move in committee or on the floor of this House and there will be no further erosion of their rights.
His promise didnt hold up, however, and his GOA rating quickly dropped to well below the C-level. In 1996, the Republican-led Congress passed the gun free school zones act, creating criminal safe zones like Virginia Tech, where the only person armed was a murderous criminal. Speaker Newt Gingrich voted for the bill containing this ban.
The same bill also contained the now infamous Lautenberg gun ban, which lowered the threshold for losing ones Second Amendment rights to a mere misdemeanor. Gun owners could, as a result of this ban, lose their gun rights forever for non-violent shouting matches that occurred in the home -- and, in many cases, lose their rights without a jury trial.
While a legislator might sometimes vote for a spending bill which contains objectionable amendments, that was clearly NOT the case with Newt Gingrich in 1996. Speaking on Meet the Press in September of that year, Speaker Gingrich said the Lautenberg gun ban was a very reasonable position. He even refused to cosponsor a repeal of the gun ban during the next Congress -- despite repeated requests to do so.
Also in 1996, Speaker Gingrich cast his vote for an anti-gun terror bill which contained several harmful provisions. For example, one of the versions he supported (in March of that year) contained a DeLauro amendment that would have severely punished gun owners for possessing a laser sighting device while committing an infraction as minor as speeding on a federal reservation. (Not only would this provision have stigmatized laser sights, it would have served as a first step to banning these items.) Another extremely harmful provision was the Schumer amendment to centralize Federal, State and Local police.
Please Note: Discussion is welcomed not attacks. I am not tearing anyone down but simply pointing out that Gingrich, no matter what he says, has been no Friend to OUR rights.
These things can be proven by simply researching previous positions that are on the record. There has been no recent epiphany regarding these positions. The only epiphany is the one that his tongue has had.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
Newt Gingrich Stabs Gun Owners in the Back
Katherine Mangu-Ward | December 5, 2011
In my inbox today, a message from Georgia Gun Owners who are grumpy about GOP darling of the day Newt Gingrich's record on gun control. They note his support for restrictions on the gun rights of people involved in misdemeanor domestic violence charges and the fact that he played nice with Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on gun-free school zone legislation. "But the biggest knife that Newt plunged into the back of all Americans and gun owners who wish to defend themselves and their families, was his coming out in support of a national thumbprint database for gun owners," said [D.R. Leonard, Political Director of Georgia Gun Owners]. Hey, at least his choice of weapons is ideologically consistent!
A claimed "commerce clause" power that even the SCOTUS couldn't find---and that's saying something.
Newt lied? NO WAY
The commerce clause is now being used to push a marxist agenda at full throttle speed and the so called Republicans go along with as sheep to the slaughter...
I wish Rudy Guiliano would get in this race. As a good conservative I could now vote for him since morals and values no longer count.
Newt on (fill in the blank), a mixed record.
But remember only Mitty flip flops and Newt finds the errors of his ways and changes his views based on facts and thats good thing..
Hey. Newt is the only true Conservative running. He says so himself if you ask.
Don’t forget he frequently needs to clarify his position.
But Newt’s so smart, just ask him, he’ll tell ya.
The REAL Newt Gingrich. Conservative as all get-out. Except when he’s not. And that’s only on minor things like gun control, healthcare reform, carbon caps, amnesty, NAFTA, et c.,. On meaningless procedural issues, he’d have our back - even if it means sacrificing every bit of political capital on lost causes. And that’s what really matters. Right?
If Obama is reelected in 2012, everyone in America who is not a leftist or statist will be steaming mad, watching everything he does and screaming about it for four years.
If an establishment Republican is elected, those same people will ASSUME that “things will be better” and will not so intensely follow what goes on.
The establishement nuked both of them
The one thing I can say for newt is he doesn’t trigger my gag reflex like mccain did
And I wont vote for paul or romney no matter what so for now newt is my man
QUOTE: Ill vote for whoever our guy is..
I haven’t voted FOR anyone in decades. It looks like another cursed election I’m gonna be voting AGAINST the worst of a couple of bad choices. The upside is the worst is easily discernable.
GINGRICH: That's just objectively a fact. I think if Governor (notice..it is Governor Reagan and Not President Reagan) Reagan were here today, and he were looking at where America should go, he wouldn't be saying, "Let's go back to 1980." He'd be saying, "Here are the solutions, here are the policies, here's what will carry us into the future." And I think we've watched these guys run around saying, "I'm like Reagan. I'm like Reagan." Reagan was a unique one-time personality whose great achievement in eliminating the Soviet empire was historic. Now we have a different world with a different set of problems. I don't think it can be, "Here's how you go back 28 years to reinvent Reagan." It's gotta be, "Here's how you apply conservatism to solve America's problems today."
RUSH: Wait a minute, Newt, how are you going to apply conservatism to today's problems when you just said it's dead? Reaganism is simply conservatism. That's all it is, and if the era of Reagan being over is objectively a fact, then conservatism's finished. Now, nobody's talking about going back to the 1980s and reliving the same set of policies. What we're talking about is applying principles, which is what Reagan did, to the existing problems of that era. Those policies, the premises of conservatism, work. They are timeless. It's not a scheme. It doesn't have to be bent, molded, and shaped. Tenets of conservatism survive throughout the ages, just like liberalism does. They're both philosophical ideas. For our side to run around saying, "Well, it's over," misses the whole point. Nobody's talking about bringing Reagan back the identical set of problems in 1980. We're talking about the principles of conservatism and applying them to today's problems, and not moderating them, not modifying these principles so they're a little liberal here, a little liberal here, maybe a little moderate over here.
why is newt any better than the others? I say they all suck but I’ll vote for whoever runs against obama.
Those who presume to tell you that you have no right to defend yourself, your family or your property are not merely holding the the United States Constitution, The Bill of Rights and in particular, the Second Amendment in contempt - what they are really saying is that you have no right to your own life. To them, you are a thing, an animal, or a machine. Nothing more.
They are declaring their supremacy over you by holding the value your life as little more - and often less - than a wheelbarrow full of bricks.
THAT's who we're dealing with. And as history has shown us, the ultimate destination of that outlook is something far worse than slavery.
Gingrich, for all of his talk, is no friend of human freedom.
Michele Bachmann picked up a hefty endorsement from Phyllis Schlafly today and she doesn’t qualify her promise to try to eliminate the EPA with a promise to create another federal agency to replace it like Newty.
#20, best post of the day.
Gingrich is an utter repudiation of everything the tea party stands for.
Well unless bachman or santorum can pull a moses size miracle out of they’re can in the next couple of weeks its a newt
-romney deal now so newts my man I have said I wouldn’t hold my nose again. But I am scared that if that asshat in the white house gets another four he will succeed in his original mission of pushing us off the cliff
Btw don’t care too much for perry either
How could you do that??? Is is a BIG, Big gun grabber. I would NEVER vote for him. NEVER.
How could you do that??? Is is a BIG, Big gun grabber. I would NEVER vote for him. NEVER.
Gingrich, for all of his talk, is no friend of human freedom...Noumenon
Agreed 100% on post of the day NP. Noumenon your post is thought provoking and spot on. Thank you!
Lol.. You forgot your sarc tag! Maybe you will, but thank freedom loving God, many of us refuse. Jim Rob posted a great piece on making the right decision, please read it. If anyone can organize a write in surprise it will start here. Media, Iow, etc.. You don’t think for me! You will not dictate my choice.
Sarah Palin, in spite of what has been stated here on FR and throughout msm-land, would have gone through this country like a dose of salts, however, she withdrew from the 'informal' race. No agreement on Herman Cain though. Palin had the potential. But, that is history now and now we must look at reality.
Reality is; Gingrich is, and has been, part of the problem.
Well...I’ll steal part of the phrase “...we gotta fix it.” What we ‘gotta fix’ is the all-out assault on conservatives. We are reviled, even by what we thought was our party. Do we gut the entire establishment or vote for a little more, albeit slower, socialism/marxism?
2010 showed what “We the People” can accomplish. Unfortunately, in that “landslide” some lukewarm, rino pukes, got swept in as well (and I say that with my own senator Roy Blunt in mind). However, we gutted some areas. IMO we can continue gutting and that starts at the top this go ‘round.
Your observations regarding the right to defend yourself are excellent. Note that even animals and plants have natural defense mechanisms that are not “given” to them by others.
Pro Amnesty and weak on guns?
This is our new messiah?
Look, here it is. Gun rights people are fanatic (in a good way). They go all out after any camel sticking his nose under the 2nd amendment tent. I get it. While I don't always agree with each specific issue, the policy has protected gun rights fairly well so far.
Now that position is somewhat “extreme” and most people will agree with some common sense gun laws. The ones mentioned, that Newt supported, are not that crazy.
What's wrong with the laser site law? What's wrong with not allowing convicted domestic abusers to legally possess guns?
The gun free school zones may be a mistake, but as part of a huge omnibus bill, these things happen. Repeals are harder to do. It's like trying to undo a ruling on the field.
So while Newt may not be Charleton Heston, he isn't a “Gun Grabber” either. So tone down the hyperbole and just stick to the facts. You are actually helping Newt. People are so fed up with the political assassinations going on that they aren't listening to all the noise. They don't know what to believe, so they tend to disbelieve all of it.
I won't worry one second about my 2nd amendment rights, if Newt becomes president. You shouldn't either.
Dunno who I'm going to vote for, but if events go the way I think they will, it won't matter. It's like Ann Barnhardt said: "It's like a pageant has broken out on the fantail of the Titanic amongst the oblivious at 2:00am on the 15th, with the winner to be announced upon docking at the port of New York. That's what this election cycle is like."
We've used ‘arrogant’ to describe Obama for years.......well, his ‘match’ has appeared according to many.
It makes me a criminal with the stroke of a pen.
Got ya BE. But it does make a difference...it makes a difference to our Creator. Am I serious? Yes...
Whatever happens, I know that I’m responsible and answerable for ‘my’ vote. Even if who I vote for doesn’t win I know, in my heart, that I voted with the most pro-life, pro-Country, pro-Bill of Rights candidate possible.
God will ask us (maybe not in these exact words), ‘why did you vote for someone who is for aborting my creation (when politically expedient), why did you vote for someone who believes the ‘RIGHTS’ that I bestowed upon you is negotiable... etc.
WHAT? You been asleep for the last 50 years?
When I was born, my father could have purchased for me a fully automatic, silenced weapon, without much fuss, except the unfolding of $100 bills and a little paperwork from the 1938 legislation.
We've lost LOTS of ground on firearms since '38.
And people here on a conservative website say.... "Protected gun rights fairly well so far".
When we get back to where we were in 1937.... then I'll agree with you, after noting the dark period of the crushing of personal freedoms between the '30s and whenever that joyous days occurs.
BTW, the 1938 legislation was largely in response to crimes committed by Bonnie and Clyde.
The irony is that while full auto was available to the public up until that point, the 1938 law would not have prevented Clyde Barrows crimes.
He stole full auto BAR’s from national guard armories.
So once again, we see that these laws only hinder law abiding citizens.
Spot on johnny.
"I think we prefer to go to instant check on an immediate basis and try to accelerate implementing instant checks so that you could literally check by thumbprint... Instant check is a much better system than the Brady process." -- June 27, 1997
This weekend, your National Association for Gun Rights, working in conjunction with our Iowa state-level affiliate, Iowa Gun Owners, began using phone calls designed to alert tens of thousands of gun rights activists across Iowa about Newt Gingrich's decades-long support of gun control . . .
. . . and his refusal to return his National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey.
Newt Gingrich should quit stonewalling gun owners and return his National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey -- IMMEDIATELY!