PDA

View Full Version : Once again, Tom Campbell sucks on the 2nd Amendment


oldrifle
05-08-2010, 11:42 AM
The candidates had one of their liveliest moments during a lightning round in which they were asked whether anyone on the federal government's no-fly watch list should be able to purchase a gun.

Campbell said no, while Fiorina and DeVore said yes.

That caught Campbell off guard. "Oh, my goodness," he said, sparking laughs.

"It's called the Second Amendment, Tom," DeVore said.

"That's why Tom Campbell has kind of a poor rating from the National Rifle Association, right there," Fiorina chimed in.

Campbell said someone should wait until he is off the no-fly list before buying a gun. Fiorina disputed that, saying that many people undeservedly land on the no-fly list, while DeVore said it would infringe on one's right to a trial.

"That is not an infringement on anybody's Second Amendment rights," said Campbell, a former law professor at Stanford. "It seems somewhat unusual to take that position – except perhaps in a Republican primary."



Article: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/07/2733962/gop-senate-candidates-run-to-the.html

I really wish I could support this guy because he has so many great ideas, but when it comes to certain issues the man is just a dunce.

FirstFlight
05-08-2010, 12:41 PM
Me thinks that Tom Campbell is Babs Boxer in drag

sholling
05-08-2010, 1:11 PM
Me thinks that Tom Campbell is Babs Boxer in drag
+1. Of course Carly is Babs in drag as a republican.

GrizzlyGuy
05-08-2010, 1:50 PM
WoW, this guy needs a refresher course on the Constitution. Besides 2A, there is also this little thing called Due Process... :rolleyes:

mattmcg
05-08-2010, 2:04 PM
Tom is a complete waste. After working with him in the past in an indirect manner, he is frankly clueless for what it means to be a republican. Sure he has the less spending down pat but the increased taxes and infringement on constitutional rights make him worthless pond scum.

Throwing the RINOs and moderates out of the party will be the only thing that will save the Republican party.

bwiese
05-08-2010, 2:21 PM
We roundly attacked Tom Campbell in this thread: he (or a minion having his exact phrasing and echoes of his sentiments) visited here, was 100% rebuffed and sent packing....

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=231083

He believes in 'city vs rural' gun distinctions, throwing people in jail for pistol grips on their rifles, etc. He believes in a worthless 2nd with 'rational basis' support for antigun laws, and thus devalues not only the 2nd but the rest of the Bill of Rights as well as the 14th Amendment.

mike_schwartz@mail.com
05-08-2010, 8:49 PM
On my commute home I heard a radio interview with (at the time) Republican candidate for California governor Tom Campbell. I called in and asked his views on the Second Amendment; specifically when it comes to issuing concealed weapon permits and the CA “assault weapons" ban. His answer was convoluted and vague, but basically he is for letting counties limit concealed weapon permits at will and banning types of rifles based on their aesthetics. He said the Second Amendment includes the word “regulated” which, to him, means the state can limit your right to keep and bear firearms.
The radio station cut me off after my question so I went home and started an e-mail debate with Mr. Campbell.

A couple of excerpts from Tom’s e-mail to me:

“The well regulated portion of the text means the state, which trains the militia, has the right to regulate it, and to regulate it well.”

“The state has the right to decide what it takes to make its militia functional and trained. But, the individual has the right to keep and bear arms. The two parts have to work together.”

“Do you agree with me that weapons capable of doing huge harm can be kept from individual ownership? (Tanks, bazookas, etc?)”

Tanks and bazookas? When has this argument been about tanks and bazookas? I asked him about commonly owned long rifles. There is no gun rights group or Second Amendment group…in fact there is no group of any kind in this country, that I know of, who is fighting for the right to buy tanks and bazookas.

lioneaglegriffin
05-08-2010, 9:08 PM
is there even a pro 2A republican for senate or governor?

mike_schwartz@mail.com
05-08-2010, 9:12 PM
Correct me if i am wrong, but Chuck DeVore is "A" rated...right?

AJAX22
05-08-2010, 9:17 PM
Tanks are legal...250k will get you a t72 delivered to your door... If your serious let me know and I'll hook you up with the people who can make it happen

2009_gunner
05-08-2010, 9:47 PM
is there even a pro 2A republican for senate or governor?

It looks like I'll be voting Libertarian for Senate, and I'll be voting Democrat for the first time in my life with Jerry Brown.

I've read nothing good on this lot of "Republicans."

oldrifle
05-08-2010, 9:48 PM
Tanks are legal...250k will get you a t72 delivered to your door... If your serious let me know and I'll hook you up with the people who can make it happen

I'll take 2.

dfletcher
05-08-2010, 10:03 PM
We roundly attacked Tom Campbell in this thread: he (or a minion having his exact phrasing and echoes of his sentiments) visited here, was 100% rebuffed and sent packing....

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=231083

He believes in 'city vs rural' gun distinctions, throwing people in jail for pistol grips on their rifles, etc. He believes in a worthless 2nd with 'rational basis' support for antigun laws, and thus devalues not only the 2nd but the rest of the Bill of Rights as well as the 14th Amendment.

Having read most of the threads since Tom Campbell accepted our invite I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for perhaps a bit longer than most, but I have to say after this latest exchange he's definitely shown no feeling for this subject and its importance, I certainly shall not vote for him.

lioneaglegriffin
05-08-2010, 10:14 PM
Correct me if i am wrong, but Chuck DeVore is "A" rated...right?

but what of viability? methinks he's not running against boxer.

last i saw him in polling he was third with Campbell first.

sholling
05-08-2010, 10:17 PM
Throwing the RINOs and moderates out of the party will be the only thing that will save the Republican party.
That wouldn't leave more than 1, possibly 2 current office holders still in the entire state party.

Legasat
05-08-2010, 10:20 PM
is there even a pro 2A republican for senate or governor?

Yes, gotta give Chuck Devore credit where credit is due. He IS Pro 2A.

Can he actually win? That is a different discussion.

So maybe the correct question is: "Is there a Pro 2A candidate running for anything that can actually win?"

We're gonna get screwed again in 2010 no matter who wins what....

Harrison_Bergeron
05-08-2010, 10:34 PM
With Heller already binding at the Federal level how much does a Senator's opinion on the RKBA really matter?

lioneaglegriffin
05-08-2010, 10:59 PM
With Heller already binding at the Federal level how much does a Senator's opinion on the RKBA really matter?

fewer federal gun lesgislation cases to take up before the SCOTUS because they're unconstitutional maybe. meaning less NRA/CGF money wasted on new unconstitutional laws? and more spent on existing/old unconstituional laws.\\

but there is a more or less pro-gun majority on the hill as it is. one more would be nice but we can't cry over something we didn't have to begin with. (a pro-gun senator)

Sinixstar
05-08-2010, 11:40 PM
“The well regulated portion of the text means the state, which trains the militia, has the right to regulate it, and to regulate it well.”

To some extent - i'm kind of glad overall, and more then willing, to let people continue to make this argument, and push their agenda using this logic. It just makes it all the easier to get thrown out in court. Their entire argument, and entire line of thinking - is based quite literally on historical ignorance. If that's the best they can come up with - we're in better shape then I thought.

berto
05-08-2010, 11:47 PM
With Heller already binding at the Federal level how much does a Senator's opinion on the RKBA really matter?

Heller left room for reasonable restrictions. Our idea of reasonable is certainly different than that of Feinstein, Schumer, or Campbell and that difference of opinion is likely to reach SCOTUS.

Bloomberg and the NY Times editorial board aren't alone in wanting to keep those on the No Fly List from buying firearms. Campbell supports the idea too. It's a silly idea and unlikely to go far at this point but our fight is long term. An extra Senate vote our way can only help.

dfletcher
05-09-2010, 10:55 AM
Just watching a rerun of the debate and the "no fly" question. Mr Campbell came across as very pejorative and the further follow up of Devore and Fiorina (especially Devore) was supportive of the 2nd. I don't know if Devore is tall or the other two are just short, but someone should tell him to stand up straight and wear a better suit. I think he could do better, I expected to see him as a bit more of a fumbler based on the bits & pieces I've seen on the news.

Campbell doesn't come across as sincere - he "lost" the camera on an answer or two then rather obviously reaquired and locked eyes on it. I don't think wearing a toupe' helps, unfair though that may be.