pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
It doesn't matter who wins, a look at SCOTUS
#61
i have. We've already done this Kevin and you've been proven wrong. you admitted you were unaware that the existing law was going to lose all its teeth until Mr gun banner signed that bill. The existing law required the fed bill language had romney not signed it the existing law would have banned nothing. Instead he signed it and reinstated and extended an assault weapons ban. He banned guns Kevin. Get over it. Go read that thread again. Its all laid out. Official law links and the release from Romney's office stating he extended the law.. I think even the you tube video of him stating that people shouldn't have access to those types of weapons.

Your spin doesn't work. The facts above are what happened. Maybe a veto would have been overturned but don't know that at all because he rolled over and signed it. Of course if it was overturned the fucking bill would have become law anyway. Since you're okay with him passing an awb why not just wait for it to be overturned then and preserving your integrity. I know why he has none and as he stated clearly he thinks people should not be able to own these types of weapons.. nice. Spin that somehow.. its nonsense and your are lying.

kevindsingleton;33175 Wrote:
ExcelToExcel;33112 Wrote:So we should vote for a guy that removed guns from being purchased for a whole state! No thanks.. If you are wondering why we're fucked.. Look at the economy.. Then tell me that with mounds of debt and unemployment at the heights it is really at and tell me with a straight face we're not fucked.

The ban was already in place. He added no guns to the banned list. You know, as well as the rest of us, that the bill would have passed without the compromises that were added at Romney's request. Pretending that Romney banned guns is simply a lie. Romney's only contribution to that bill was to increase liberty. Those are the facts.

Go, read the bill.

Please. It's the least you could do
Reply
#62
ExcelToExcel;33186 Wrote:i have. We've already done this Kevin and you've been proven wrong. you admitted you were unaware that the existing law was going to lose all its teeth until Mr gun banner signed that bill. The existing law required the fed bill language had romney not signed it the existing law would have banned nothing. Instead he signed it and reinstated and extended an assault weapons ban. He banned guns Kevin. Get over it. Go read that thread again. Its all laid out. Official law links and the release from Romney's office stating he extended the law.. I think even the you tube video of him stating that people shouldn't have access to those types of weapons.

Your spin doesn't work. The facts above are what happened. Maybe a veto would have been overturned but don't know that at all because he rolled over and signed it. Of course if it was overturned the fucking bill would have become law anyway. Since you're okay with him passing an awb why not just wait for it to be overturned then and preserving your integrity. I know why he has none and as he stated clearly he thinks people should not be able to own these types of weapons.. nice. Spin that somehow.. its nonsense and your are lying.

I was unaware, until I read the bill, myself, and then posted it, myself.

As you admit, had he not signed it, it would have become law, anyway, and it might have been passed without the liberty-enhancing compromises that were included to encourage the governor to sign the bill. Had he vetoed the bill, it's equally likely to have been passed over the veto. So, the only way to ensure that the enhancements to liberty were included was to sign the bill into law.

A bill was going to be passed. Romney did what he was able to do to reduce some of the burden on gun owners in Massachusetts. I'll continue to see it as "glass half full".

Compromise happens.
kevindsingleton, proud to be a contributing member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.

Have some Pi: http://www.raspberrypi.org/
Reply
#63
If I were a moderator I'd suggest sticking to the actual topic of this thread instead of beating an unrelated dead horse.


Big Grin
Reply
#64
Just to address one point made earlier:

You can buy an AR 15 in Mass, today. They're not like the AR's you can get at any Gander Mountain in PA, but you *can* get an AR 15 in Mass.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BecUc2uJju4
Vampire pig man since September 2012
Reply
#65
It would NOT have become law if he didn't sign it. What world do you live in. It MAY have but then we don't know because your backstabbing coward savior signed it.

You'll continue to make excuses.

kevindsingleton;33203 Wrote:
ExcelToExcel;33186 Wrote:i have. We've already done this Kevin and you've been proven wrong. you admitted you were unaware that the existing law was going to lose all its teeth until Mr gun banner signed that bill. The existing law required the fed bill language had romney not signed it the existing law would have banned nothing. Instead he signed it and reinstated and extended an assault weapons ban. He banned guns Kevin. Get over it. Go read that thread again. Its all laid out. Official law links and the release from Romney's office stating he extended the law.. I think even the you tube video of him stating that people shouldn't have access to those types of weapons.

Your spin doesn't work. The facts above are what happened. Maybe a veto would have been overturned but don't know that at all because he rolled over and signed it. Of course if it was overturned the fucking bill would have become law anyway. Since you're okay with him passing an awb why not just wait for it to be overturned then and preserving your integrity. I know why he has none and as he stated clearly he thinks people should not be able to own these types of weapons.. nice. Spin that somehow.. its nonsense and your are lying.

I was unaware, until I read the bill, myself, and then posted it, myself.

As you admit, had he not signed it, it would have become law, anyway, and it might have been passed without the liberty-enhancing compromises that were included to encourage the governor to sign the bill. Had he vetoed the bill, it's equally likely to have been passed over the veto. So, the only way to ensure that the enhancements to liberty were included was to sign the bill into law.

A bill was going to be passed. Romney did what he was able to do to reduce some of the burden on gun owners in Massachusetts. I'll continue to see it as "glass half full".

Compromise happens.
Reply
#66
Emptymag;33211 Wrote:If I were a moderator I'd suggest sticking to the actual topic of this thread instead of beating an unrelated dead horse.


Big Grin

I was hoping this wouldn't head downhill to this point.
IronSight, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#67
ExcelToExcel;33624 Wrote:It would NOT have become law if he didn't sign it. What world do you live in. It MAY have but then we don't know because your backstabbing coward savior signed it.

You'll continue to make excuses.

There's no place for naivete in politics. Let's face the facts:

"But the GOP nominee consistently struggled to have his veto upheld during his tenure. Romney used his line-item veto 844 times, more than 700 of which were overturned by the Legislature, including every veto offered during his last year in office, according to an analysis by the Boston Globe."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-...6935.story

Back to the ignore list with you.
kevindsingleton, proud to be a contributing member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.

Have some Pi: http://www.raspberrypi.org/
Reply
#68
This doesn't change the fact that he could have vetoed it. Its just another excuse by a republican apologist hypocrite. The reason I'm on your ignore list is because if someone doesn't drink the koolaid your offering you get pissy.

kevindsingleton;33929 Wrote:
ExcelToExcel;33624 Wrote:It would NOT have become law if he didn't sign it. What world do you live in. It MAY have but then we don't know because your backstabbing coward savior signed it.

You'll continue to make excuses.

There's no place for naivete in politics. Let's face the facts:

"But the GOP nominee consistently struggled to have his veto upheld during his tenure. Romney used his line-item veto 844 times, more than 700 of which were overturned by the Legislature, including every veto offered during his last year in office, according to an analysis by the Boston Globe."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-...6935.story

Back to the ignore list with you.
Reply






Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  SCOTUS kevindsingleton 5 1,127 06-29-2015, 10:16 AM
Last Post: halftrack
  Pelosi says she doesn’t know who Jonathan Gruber is. She touted his work in 2009. das 2 833 11-14-2014, 01:12 AM
Last Post: Ten*K
  Putin wins again Pocketprotector 3 1,013 03-30-2014, 08:02 AM
Last Post: Camper
  SEN. RAND PAUL WINS 2014 CPAC STRAW POLL Philadelphia Patriot 10 2,203 03-09-2014, 10:11 PM
Last Post: Dave
  "If Congress doesn’t act, the president will" Philadelphia Patriot 20 10,820 01-27-2014, 11:09 PM
Last Post: ExcelToExcel



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.