Apparently supporters of Sam Rohrer are starting turn into Ronulans, appearing heavily in the Capitol Ideas post that covered CeaseFire PA’s endorsement policies to promote their favorite candidate. I like Sam Rohrer. Hell, I’ll even vote for him in the primary. But as I mentioned rather facetiously last October, the leap he was trying to make was probably too great. As our A+ rated reps go, I’m going to miss him from the state House, and wish he would have tried to step up to a more modest office before making the big leap for the big chair.
But I’m not worried too much. Tom Corbett, if he wins both races, will be the most pro-gun governor we’ve had in 24 years. On other issues, I don’t find him to be particularly offensive, which likely means Independents won’t find him particularly offensive either, and you need Independents for a Republican to win in Pennsylvania.
Gee, I dunno,
Did you see the you tube videos of Corbett at FOAC talking about confiscating firearms and his involvement in the Philly task force (warrentless search and seizures)? Corbett may have done some good with reciprocity, but he seems to be pretty selective regarding 2A. Not sure I can vote for him.
Confiscating what firearms? And last I checked Corbett’s effort was to go after straw purchasers, which I doubt Rohrer is opposed to.
I’m not disparaging what Rohrer has done for our gun rights. It’s part of the reason I think he’s earned my vote. But let’s get real about Corbett.. Corbett is pro-gun. He’s done a lot for us, and if he comes out the winner of the primary I’ll be 100% behind him.
http://cbs3.com/local/Philadelphia.Task.Force.2.306007.html?detectflash=false
The most chilling part of this article states:
Police also plan to ask home owners at times for consent to search their homes without a probable-cause warrant, District Attorney Lynne M. Abraham said Monday.
“If we go to a house, we’re going to ask the owner of the house if they will consent to a search for illegal weapons,” Abraham said at a news conference. “Any gun that we can find that way is one more gun we can get off the street.”
Corbett made sure he did not participate in that action personally. but his 5 million bucks made it possible nonetheless. Rohrer may well be for going after straw purchasers, I don’t know. I doubt though that he’d participate in a task force program that included Warrentless searches as a leg of its operation. He would not
use tax dollars to enable such a thing.
I ask again, confiscating of what firearms?
Are you aware of how a warrentless search and seizure works…in Philly?
If they ask, and you give them permission, that pretty much takes care of the legal situation. But in the article I read, Corbett distanced himself from that tactic.
“If” they ask is a pivotal question. Would I dare be so brazen as to suggest that they did not ask politely? Yes I would. In the neighborhoods where this took place, do you think the people are able to quote Constitutional law to the police? But, for the sake of the arguement, What types of guns are illegal in Philly?
Corbett’s words distanced him, yes…but in my book, $5 million puts him right up close and snuggly with the issue. All part of the same program.
I think that’s pretty flimsy evidence of Corbett supporting gun confiscation. The gun laws in Philly are the same as the rest of the state. That’s why we have preemption. Which Corbett has done much to support when it’s been attacked.
You are indeed correct, the gun laws are the same. Philly already lost that case in court. So, if a task force enters a home, do you think, if they discover a firearm, that they will immediately, on the spot, run the numbers on the gun to discover if it is legally owned…..or will they just sieze the gun and run the numbers later and press charges if need be?
You may think it is flimsey evidence, but Corbett put up 5 million and Fumo put up 5 million. It was a meeting of minds. I contend that Sam Rohrer would not have engaged in such an agreement.
So, although I think corbett is not for a general confiscation of all firearms, I think he selectively would agree to it. the link below is to the video I referenced earlier. His words did not say otherwise. Yes, guilt by ommission, especially when he jumped around the issue as he did in this response.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KbhwReqDUA&feature=player_embedded#
I’m coming into this thread very late, and as a GA resident, I don’t have a dog in the hunt. But I did watch the video that Eric linked to and here is how it looked to me:
Sam Rhorer unequivacally stated that disarming citizens, even in case of an emergency, is unconstitutional and would be treasonous for a governor to so order troops to do this.
Tom Corbett never did actually answer the question, but put it into the realm of an impossible doomsday scenario, so there’s no reason to even really answer.
My motto with politicians is, if their lips are moving, they’re probably lying.
If you asked me who I’d trust my guns rights in the hands of more? I’d say Sam Rohrer. Without a doubt. But Rohrer has a lot of other negatives as a candidate, the least of which being he’s probably not going to win his primary, and even if he does, I’m pretty sure he doesn’t have what it takes to win the general election.
The big problem with Rohrer is turning out to be he’s a lousy fundraiser and isn’t spending what money he does have wisely. For better or worse the ability to raise money means more to a candidates ability to win than his principles does. That’s just the way it is.
I’ll probably vote for Sam in the primary, but I’m not sold yet. These Democrats running for PA guv are all going to be a disaster for our rights, which I’ll cover tomorrow. In the end I don’t want to be stuck with a candidate who can’t beat the Democrat.