Herman Cain and gun control
Says restricting a fundamental right is a state’s decision. I don’t know that was his intent and think he may have misspoke. But if that is what he meant, then he is wrong.
12 Responses to “Herman Cain and gun control”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
June 9th, 2011 at 9:19 am
Having read his reply, it seems to actually fall within the Heller scope. He’s saying that the 2nd Amendment is not an unlimited right, however much we may agree with that.
I think that he strongly supports 2nd Amendment rights. He deserves a chance to expound upon his statement.
June 9th, 2011 at 9:48 am
Our rights as Americans cannot be taken away from us by the particular state that we live in.
Herman is trying to play both sides of the issue and comes off sounding like a BS artist. He’s trying to make gun owners and anti-gunners happy at the same time. It’s been done before.
The 2nd Amendment only gets complicated when people try to make it mean other than what it says because they have a political interest that goes against freedom.
Herman can’t oppose infringement and support infringement at the same time. He’s trying and failing, and it’s funny if you think about it, but who wants to live under a POTUS who flips a coin to decide what he thinks of the 2nd Amendment at any given moment when he has to make a decision?
Sorry, Herman, but either you support my rights, in a real sense, or you can just GTFOOT.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:11 am
Has anyone shown the Fourteenth Amendment to Mr. Cain?
Does he understand all the blood that was shed to ensure that states, counties, cities and towns cannot infringe upon the rights of Americans, and historically African-Americans?
Can someone send him Halbrook’s book?
June 9th, 2011 at 10:31 am
Mr. Cain is highly confused on constitutional right or history for that matter. In his short campaign he has mixed up the declaration of independence and the constitution, followed by striking out on state/federal rights by not reading any part of the constitution but the bill of rights.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:49 am
If he meant it, then Herman Cain just pulled a Newt Gingrich. His campaign is over.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:53 am
A question:
Of the declared candidates, who supports the 2nd Amendment the most?
June 9th, 2011 at 11:04 am
Cargosquid: shouldn’t that be, “Of the declared candidates, who is most likely NOT to waffle on the Second Amendment?”
Here’s my take on Cain. He’s NOT a politician. He runs things. He’s a leader. If elected, he’s likely to appoint a staff of advisers who will be conservative and follow the Bill of Rights quite carefully, because he has no interest in using the Government to achieve anything past what the Constitution demanded of it when the document was written. Extending the “reach” or the “spirit” of the Constitution is what gets liberals and other statists in trouble.
How well he could achieve that goal, having to deal with a band of statists from both sides of the aisles, is anyone’s guess, but Reagan seemed to pull it off fairly well.
BTW, doesn’t the FOPA supposedly protect us Interstate travelers from drive-through or fly-through states hassling us over firearms? If FOPA isn’t doing the job, then someone needs to sue to hold some states’ feet to the letter of that law.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:28 am
17 months until the next Presidential Election. I’m sure Mr. Cain will clarify and expand what he meant before he withdraws from the Race due to the Republitard MetroCon Good Old Boys backing of Romney, the Stupid F%#ks.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:36 am
Technically it is up to the states to follow federal laws when it comes to the 2nd amendment. I think it sounds like a non committal answer to me… Now if he started giving his speeches while open carrying he would be the man……
June 9th, 2011 at 12:14 pm
“Now if he started giving his speeches while open carrying he would be the man……”
Hmmmmm, has anybody suggested this to him?
June 9th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
Non answer, answer to a very stupid question for a person running for POTUS.
State laws are up to the states and the SCOTUS.
Ask Cain about Judicial appointments and then we can dig into it.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:51 pm
That’s more or less what Ken Cuccinelli told me when he was running for attorney general here in VA. Regulation of firearms is the purview of the states, not the feds.
Were it not for Amendment XIV, I think I would agree.