Previous Post
Next Post


“We support the fundamental right to self-defense wherever a law abiding citizen has a legal right to be, and we support federal legislation that would expand the exercise of that right by allowing those with state-issued carry permits to carry firearms in any state that issues such permits to its own residents. Gun ownership is responsible citizenship, enabling Americans to defend their homes and communities. We condemn frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers and oppose federal licensing or registration of law-abiding gun owners. We oppose legislation that is intended to restrict our Second Amendment rights by limiting the capacity of clips or magazines or otherwise restoring the ill considered Clinton gun ban.” – Republican Party Platform, 2012

Previous Post
Next Post


    • It’s a solid but safe statement. I wouldn’t call it strong. And it remains to be seen to what degree it will be backed up by policy. There’s plenty of wiggle room. Will a Romney justice department pursue civil rights violations by the states with the same zeal as the Holder DoJ? Or will minimal compliance, circumventions and even non-compliance of Heller and McDonald decisions be allowed to continue?

      • If they don’t win, they’re not going to be able to repeal the current limitations. Do you think carry reciprocity has a snowball’s chance of being signed into law with Obama in the White House?

        This is the first time anything like this has been in a national party platform, and I don’t think they would have put something so specific (as opposed to vague pro-2nd-A pablum) in if they weren’t willing to deliver.

        It’s time to get off the sidelines. This is the best offer we’ve had in decades.

        • “If they don’t win, they’re not going to be able to repeal the current limitations.”

          Uh-huh. Got some money? I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

          “Do you think carry reciprocity has a snowball’s chance of being signed into law with Obama in the White House?”

          Four legs good,
          Two legs bad!

          Four legs good,
          Two legs bad!

          Jones! Jones!!

          BTW, why in the world would you consider a federal reciprocity to be pro-gun? Grassroots (something the GOP hates) have, through “Open Carry” for example, been moving states toward getting rid of the unconstitutional permit systems entirely. The GOP would squash that and move us toward a federal permit system.

          In their “platform” they have language like “..federal legislation that would expand the exercise of that right..”. “Expand” a right? That should tell you right there how they feel about what a “Right” is.

          “It’s time to get off the sidelines. This is the best offer we’ve had in decades.”

          It’s a big joke.

        • It sounds good to be able to carry in any state if you have a permit. But I’m afraid that will result in a national registration, where the Fed. will have a list of all gun owners and the types of guns they have.

          I have a carry permit for Wash. but when I travel to Calif. my permit doesn’t do me anygood because I go through Oregon and Cal, and my permit isnt any good in those states. Some states already reckognize other states permits, but then states like NY and Ca. and some others don’t. It’s really confusing, but I don’t want the chance of the Feds having a list of all gun owners.

  1. More ammunition to call Romney a flip-flopper. I do believe that because of him, the fine citizens of Massachusetts can only own neutered weapons.

    • The fine citizens of Massachusetts (I’m one of them) can own any almost any semiautomatic that they want. MA bans full auto and magazines over ten rounds — unless they predate the ban — and doodads like forward grips, grendade launchers and flash hiders (compensators and muzzle brakes are legal). But I don’t know anyone in the Commonwealth who doesn’t own at least one AR and there are a ton of AK clones floating around, too. WASR-10s seem to be extremely popular.

      The MA AWB is annoying, but that’s it. What’s killing us are the bogus “safety” regulations enacted by the Democrat Attorney General and have nothing to do with Romney. Because of those regulations, you can’t buy a new Glock in the state. It’s a crazy situation, but Smith & Wesson and Ruger aren’t complaining.

      • So you can’t buy a semi-auto handgun with a 15 round magazine? Seems pretty neutered to me. Do MA residents drive to other states to buy normal capacity magazines? Is it legal to mail order them?

        • No, we can’t drive to buy nor wait by the mail box–but we can (and do!) learn to reload quickly and efficiently.

          Remember, that which doesn’t kill you makes you stronger (according to Goethe).

  2. wow, tough crowd.
    Any chance in hell of seeing this from the democrats?No. So be glad at least one side supports it.

    • We need to be just as wary of politicians that tell us what we want to hear as we are of those that don’t. Even more so.

      • “We need to be just as wary of politicians that tell us what we want to hear as we are of those that don’t. Even more so.”

        THIS +100000000000

  3. bullshit this is not strong enough. they need to remove the barrel ban. and the sporting rifle requirement for importation

    • Here’s a guy who gets it.

      A lot of our current problems as enthusiasts actually derive from old executive orders that the president could repeal whenever the hell they wanted to, with no fanfare whatsoever. Do you think removing the barrel ban, or lightening up a bit on 922r would be a big political issue? Not even remotely. Even allowing Chinese ammo imports would not be terribly controversial if handled correctly.

      No, it should tell you pretty much everything you need to know when GWB did absolutely nothing for gun owners in his eight years in office except screw us a little harder with the barrel ban. Why should I expect Mittens to do anything for us? What is he promising in this area? A BIG LOAD OF NOTHING.

      I’d love it for a TTAG writer to go to Romney’s campaign and actually get some promises out of them for real concrete action in this area. What they’re promising right now is basically status quo, and that’s not good enough. Romney has a well-deserved reputation as being a gun-grabber, and he needs to PROVE he’s on our side… by promising to repeal or modify SPECIFIC executive orders.

      • I suppose a majority GOP House and Senate(which I think is a distinct possibility), could propose whatever repeal of gun legislation they want. Romney is such a political animal I don’t see him bucking the wishes of the party.

        While I have a lot of issues with Ryan’s votes in the past, he does have his NRA bona fides, right? He did get an A rating, or am I mistaken?

        • Unless there is a tie in the Senate, Ryan doesn’t get a vote. Or much of a say. The VP’s job is to do what the President tells him to do, and not toot his own horn or embark on his own agenda.

    • “bullsh** this is not strong enough. they need to
      remove the barrel ban. and the sporting rifle
      requirement for importation”


      Their platform statement is the most pro-gun in history?

      No, I say the it’s the opposite. The fact they have to come out and act like they are some kind of super-patriots for stating in their platform things that should be such a given that it shouldn’t even have to be mentioned(Ex: “..obtain and store ammunition without registration.”), while working so hard to drive conservatives out of the party and giving us the most liberal candidate to date (“Obama the White” (Romeny)) should tell you all you need to know.

      LOL. It’s all so obvious I feel silly even typing it out. It’s all a big joke.

      I’ll start being interested when the Republicans(what are those again?) start actively moving in this direction…

      Abolish the Department of Fatherland Security.
      -no TSA
      -no NDAA
      Repeal the GCA68 and eliminate the BATF.
      -no FFLs
      -no 4473s
      -no NICS
      Repeal the NFA

  4. The Platform is meaningless beyond media fanfare anyway. There is ZERO enforcement on this and NOTHING that makes candidates adhere to it. It’s window dressing. Granted, it is GOOD window dressing, but I will be impressed when I see it translated into passed legislation, defeated legislation, or repealed prior legislation.

    Either way, it is still better then any thing we will get from the Demunists.

  5. If republicans were serious about any of this, it would have been addressed during the Bush-era republican controlled congress and presidency. As it turns out, all they’re serious about is expanding wars, increasing spending and debt, and violating civil liberties.

  6. A party platform is a framework to guide future actions. It is intent. It is also a bunch of words to get elected. If the RNC included this in the party platform, it is miles ahead of the DNC which we should all hope completely ignore any reference to firearms.

    As to the completeness of the statement in solving all/most/some of the most annoying anti-gun laws, I’ll take what I can get from politicians if it is headed in the right direction. That said, I’d be surprised (pleasantly) if any of their words make a difference.

  7. I know not to trust in anything that a liar err a politician or a political-gang err -party promises. Still, this is much better than the other side’s position.

    • “Still, this is much better than
      the other side’s position.”

      It’s no different than the “other side’s” position.

      If anything, the RomneyReps/GOP are more dangerous. We’ve been through all this crap before with BushII and 9/11. It’s the old Animal Farm routine: Everybody is so worked up about the overt and hostile bogey-man Jones(Democrats/Obama) that they’ll fall over themselves to keep the pigs(Republicans) in power even as they implement the agenda everyone feared had Jones come back.

      Both “sides” are active in the agenda for destroying our rights and implementing a socialist police-state.

  8. when the 68gca was pushed through by the dems we had a period of restrictions that followed that we’re still trying to undo. in the 70’s there were practically no shall issue states. then we got the awb, another dem idea. i don’t have the wikifu skills to check this completely, but i’ll bet that most of the pro 2a moves, such as the near universal shall issue states come from gop controlled statehouses. look at ca. and illinois, both run by dems. as for mass. yes mitt was governor but the state was run by dems. new york city’s baa baa bloomberg isn’t a dem but who gives him support in anti 2a moves.

    keep following the dems and we may have a country with gun laws like ca, mass, and ill.

  9. Let’s hope this is more than political posturing. This year gun rights are a huge hot button issue, but once in office there may be less incentive to actually bring some freedom back to America

  10. It’s just political posturing because the Republicans need gun owners’ and 2A Proponents’ votes to throw Obama out. There are ample reasons to throw Obama out beyond gun rights issues…so, I take this Platform Statement (Milquetoast though it may be) as the merest glimmer of hope that things won’t get worse under the Romney Presidency. That’s the best I can manage.

  11. On this subject, or maybe not. What has become of the Concealed Carry Reciprocity bill passed (I think) by the house? Is it buried in committee in the Senate, and if so, who and where can we all start emailing and calling to get it out for a vote. The Senate reconvenes in September, let’s make them vote on it before the election in November!

      • It has never been assigned to committee. That takes action by the senate majority leader–which in this case is Harry Reid. Reid, at DiFi’s request, has buried the legislation by not assigning it to committee, probably because it had a fairly decent chance of passing–there being enough Dems who will vote for it along with the Republican mamabers. So unless the majority in the Senate changes, the bill is going nowhere fast.

        • what have i been saying about the dems and gun control. with barry in the oval office people like reid and difi get to act up. no, the gop isn’t perfect, but for guns they’re better than the dems.

  12. Funny what can happen to a right. It can be infringed upon so much and its ravaging become so commonplace that when a political party supports no further infringements, but says nothing about repealing the already unjust restrictions on it, they call it support.

  13. So let me see if I got this right, some so of you called gun rights advocates say they see no difference between the GOP statement and policy on the Second Amendment . The acceptance of an absolute right to keep and bear arms,the extension of Concealed Carry to all States , The guarantee of the right to self defense and the ending of frivolous law suits.
    As opposed to the DNC who advocate a reinstatement of the Assault weapon ban, the imposition of magazine capacity restrictions, The reclassification of many categories of weapons to ban them from sale. and the requirement of mental health evaluation of anyone wanting to buy a gun.

    My only question is ,do these so called advocates have the mentality to be allowed to safely use a firearm. I would seriously question the mental state of anyone who cannot see the difference.

    Quite simply you have a choice. Agree with the Obama administration and hand over your dangerous and unnecessary guns, or put the GOP on trust.
    The latter is a gamble. The former an absolute certainty.
    Steve Challis , Harmony Hollow Firearms Training Ky.

Comments are closed.