It’s a presidential election year and the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) convention is upon us. That can only mean one thing: a presidential candidate will try to win the support of gun owners by speaking at the NRA convention. Lo and behold Mitt Romney is going to be lying at the convention this year:
Mitt Romney will address the National Rifle Association‘s annual meeting later this week, a speech that comes at a crucial time for the candidate who is working to appeal to the conservative base of his party as he inches closer to clinching the Republican nomination.
Romney, who tells voters on the campaign trail that he believes “we have all the laws we need” in regard to gun control, revealed for the first time just over a month ago that he owns two shotguns. When asked about his stance on gun control during a town hall meeting in Columbus, Ohio, in February, Romney said, “I believe in the second amendment, I’ll protect the second amendment. I have guns myself.”
In response to Romney’s quote that “we have all the laws we need” I must say we don’t have all the laws we need, we have too many laws. A presidential nominee isn’t going to win me over… no matter what he says, but really isn’t going to win me over by taking the safe ground on gun rights. Saying we have enough laws or we should be enforcing the laws we already have are two of the biggest copouts in the fight for gun rights. There is no reason the provisions outlined in the National Firearms Act (NFA) should be enforced and the Hughes Amendment should be discarded faster than an unwanted pregnancy on prom night. I would go so far as to say we shouldn’t enforce any laws on firearm ownership as firearms are inanimate objects and the actual issue is bad people using firearms, which requires dealing with the bad people.
Likewise, the mere fact one owns a gun doesn’t mean one is a proponent of gun rights. Sarah Brady, gun control advocate supreme, purchased a rifle for her son. Saying “I have guns myself” is an entirely empty statement as far as I’m concerned. I know a number of people who hunt, owner rifles for their sport, but are supportive of banning any weapon system they don’t own. We need to remember that this is the same Mitt Romney who supporter Massachusetts’s extremely restrictive gun control laws.
It is unfortunate that Romney will likely walk away with a great deal of support from the NRA convention. A large number of gun owners appear to have very short members, especially when a political candidate has an (R) after his name. After his speech I’m expecting a great deal of posts on various social networking sites from convention attendees proclaiming their support for Romney. Some may justify their support by claiming Romney isn’t great but he’s better than Obama while others will outright claim Romney is a strong proponent of gun rights. I do not have a short memory, in fact I rarely forget a transgression. Under no circumstance will I support Romney in any way, shape, or form. He’s scum, in fact he’s worse than scum, he’s a politician.
Don’t fall for the scam artist’s tricks. If you truly believe the Republican Party is our best chance of expanding gun rights then send a message to them, let them know you will not support them unless they have a strong proponent of gun rights. This means refusing to support Romney, even if you believe he’s “better” than Obama. When you settle for the “lesser” or two evils you just encourage both parties to run candidates who are evil.