Mitt Romney's anti-gun record: He hopes Ohio voters forget

Editor's Note 9/28/12 - Please see the following follow-up article, also by Mr. Baus - Recently discovered report forces the question: Do I owe Mitt Romney an apology?

by Chad D. Baus

Although some gun rights activists who subscribe to the Buckeye Firearms Association weekly newsletter pay attention to politics affecting gun rights day-in and day-out, and can immediately identify which candidates and officials support the Second Amendment not only in word but also in deed, and which do not, there are many other voters who don't start to pay attention until the eleventh hour. So for those of you who are just now checking into the record of the Republican presidential candidates, let me put it simply:

Mitt Romney has a record of being anti-gun.

He supported the Clinton Gun Ban in 1994, telling The Boston Herald "that's not going to make me the hero of the NRA. I don't line up with a lot of special interest groups." Not only that, but four years ago when he ran for president, he affirmed to Tim Russert on "Meet the Press" he would have signed a renewal of the failed gun control law.

As governor of Massachusetts in 2002, he signed into law what was described as "one of the toughest assault weapons laws in the country."

In his last presidential campaign, his attempt at an election year conversion failed to gain the confidence of pro-gun voters. After telling a reporter he had been a hunter "pretty much all my life," it was soon revealed that he had in fact only been hunting twice, ever, and had only joined the NRA in the run-up to his campaign. He claimed to be a gun owner, only to have later been forced to recant, and admit that it was his sons, not he, who are gun owners. And he refused to address, let alone renounce, his former anti-gun positions.

After folding his 2008 campaign earlier than he had to, and with many analysts correctly speculated that he would back in four years, I published a comprehensive list of things he could do before 2012 to prove his conversion was genuine. He hasn't lifted a finger since that time toward reaching out to gun owners. And as I wrote in that 2008 article, "If Romney waits until 2011 to speak out again on gun rights, we'll be right back to where we were in this recent primary season – looking at a candidate whose actions in office were largely anti-gun, and who has nothing but words to offer pro-gun voters in an election year."

And so as I read that the Romney train arrived in Ohio this week and has once again decided it's time to talk about gun rights, I am reminded of a question I posed to pro-gun rights voters during Romney's last presidential run, and which was subsequently published on World Net Daily: Will you be Mitt Romney's cheap date?

From the article:

Is it just me, or is it incredibly insulting every time a politician expects America's hunters, sportsmen, concealed handgun license-holders and gun owners to fall for a couple of drunken one-liners in an election year? Does a man who doesn't even list the Second Amendment among the issues important to him on his election website honestly believe we'll fall for him just because he managed to find his way to the 2007 S.H.O.T. Show to campaign? Does Mitt Romney think his election-year conversion will work on us any better than did John Kerry's Ohio goose hunting debacle in 2004? I suppose next we'll be treated to video of him sporting a fake southern drawl and saying "Can I get me a huntin' license here?"

Anti-gun GOPer Betty Montgomery recently insulted Ohio gun owners with this type of election year conversion, and that worked out for her real well (the supposedly unbeatable incumbent Ohio Attorney General was defeated by pro-gun Democrat Marc Dann last November).

It's as if Romney (and Montgomery, and Kerry, and Giuliani, and McCain, and all those who have come before) think we're all like some airheaded college girlfriend. They seem to expect that we'll watch as they repeatedly grope and fondle waitresses while we're out on a date together, but forgive them as soon as they say "I love you baby. Now go get me another beer."

Had Mitt Romney taken steps to recant his former positions or taken some of the other steps I suggested he take to prove his claims to have changed his position during the past three years, he might be standing in a much different place in the minds of the nation's gun owners. But he didn't. It's clear he simply hopes that three more years will have further clouded the memory of pro-Second Amendment voters.

Well, Mitt, I'm here to tell you that it hasn't clouded my memory. I said it during your last campaign and I'll say it again:

You can save your empty gun-guy platitudes for some other cheap date. I, for one, ain't carryin' your beer (or your petitions, or your yard signs, or your handbills, or your absentee voting cards).

Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Vice Chairman.