feed icon

Right Wing Gun Group Supports Leatherwood Over Blackburn

Posted on July 18, 2008 at 7:22 am

Gun Owners of America, the gun rights group that makes the NRA look like a bunch of nanny state gun grabbers, has endorsed a Republican insurgent against his incumbent opponent:

Gun Owners of America, one of the nation’s leading advocates for the Second Amendment, has endorsed Tom Leatherwood in the race for the 7th District congressional nomination. 

The group cited Leatherwood’s lengthy record of support for gun owners’ rights, and praised his commitment to protecting the 2nd Amendment rights of veterans. 

GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt said Leatherwood’s opponent, incumbent Marsha Blackburn, “supported a bill that allows the government to ban certain veterans from purchasing firearms without judicial oversight.  Leatherwood, on the other hand, will support the ‘Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act,’ a bill that protects veterans’ rights.”

Comments

11 Responses to “Right Wing Gun Group Supports Leatherwood Over Blackburn”

  1. Mickey writes
    July 18th, 2008 7:45 am

    mannyg, cato, novak, I thought Marsha was a ‘conservative’? How can this BE?

  2. Novak writes
    July 18th, 2008 8:11 am

    Take a look at the GOA’s ratings. I never thought I would see the day when the liberal Steve Cohen is placed in the same category as Trent Lott, Sam Brownback and Zach Wamp for being Pro- Gun Owners rights. They all received a “B” ranking which GAO classifies as “Pro-Gun Compromiser: generally leans our way”. This group believes that the NRA is a bunch of sell outs. The endorsement should however, help Leatherwood in solidifying his base that is full of Ron Paul supporters.

  3. Timmy writes
    July 18th, 2008 11:14 am

    Funny that Novak here and Jim over at Slater’s blog
    http://thenewtj105.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/the-plot-thickens-marsha-v-tom-on-guns/#comments

    have the exact same comments.

    Go get ‘em Marsha!

  4. Steve84 writes
    July 18th, 2008 11:39 am

    I guess let’s talk about strict constructionalism and loose constructionalism.
    Mickey we know what the second amendment says, “right to keep and bare arms etc…” But does it stop? do i need a tank? or a missile launcher? or ever some suped up high powered automatic weapon?. No. No. and probably not.
    The Brady bill is a compromise. You aren’t going to get you grenade launcher but you are still allowed to have a carry permit and have a gun for personal protection.

    Just because your beloved constitution doesn’t specifically make a rule AGAINST these things doesn’t mean you SHOULD have these things.

  5. Novak writes
    July 18th, 2008 9:14 pm

    Timmy,

    Let me spell it out for you because you are obviously lacking some brain cells. The name is Jim Novak and don’t you forget it. Why don’t you leave your “detective” work to those who have a little bit more wherewithal than you do.

    -Novak

  6. Mickey writes
    July 18th, 2008 10:20 pm

    Steve84 are you to decide what I should or should not have? The constitution doesn’t forbid it. period.

  7. Cato writes
    July 19th, 2008 1:09 am

    Mickey wants a tank? I wonder what Madison would say. Either way, the NRA’s endorsement is much more prestigious than one from a fringe group.

  8. Mickey writes
    July 19th, 2008 7:24 am

    During the Founding Father’s day, a person could own any weapon, if they could afford it. A cannon was perhaps the most powerful, and, yes I wish I had one.

  9. Steve84 writes
    July 19th, 2008 7:46 pm

    I’m not anyone to tell you…but Congress is. Speed limits. Illegal substances. Sodomy. Call it big government Mickey but unless you want to be smoking dope driving 100 mph touching little kids in a school zone, a little discretion is OK with me.

    Are you a dope smoking drunk driving pedophile, Mickey?

  10. MannyG writes
    July 19th, 2008 9:09 pm

    No, no, no. I always thought Mickey was some kind of human rights violating war criminal the way he’s scared of the UN. Is someone after you Mickey?

  11. Mickey writes
    July 19th, 2008 9:10 pm

    All those should and can be addressed at the STATE level, not the Federal Level.

Leave a Reply




Recent Comments

The Collective

The Latest from NashvillePost.com

Archives