[Montieth]

What' was Barnes' record on bills for ProRKBA signatures or vetos?

 

[GAGunOwner]

Barnes signed the 20 year felony law for GFL holders on MARTA and other public transportation, including bus stops. :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[Montieth]

Barnes signed the 20 year felony law for GFL holders on MARTA and other public transportation, including bus stops. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Ok. Point against him.

 

[ChipM]

Barnes signed the law preventing cities from suing gun manufacturers for crimes committed with their guns.

 

[seajay]

He also vetoed every pro gun bill ever set on his desk. Wanted 3 day waiting period, New York style gun control, state approval for firearm purchases (Like FOID) and other nasty stuff. Sure hope no one shoots one of his cows...

 

[gunsmoker]

Roy Barnes got an "A" rating from the NRA, right?
Didn't I just see that in my latest American Rifleman?
So how could he get top marks from the NRA if he has a proven track record of vetoing pro-gun bills?
Do you have any bill numbers we can look up, or newspaper articles to link to, showing such a veto, or quoting him with those anti-gun remarks?

 

[seajay]

I'll see what I can find. You don't have to be pro gun to get an "A" from the NRA.

 

[vr6glidriver]

Roy Barnes got an "A" rating from the NRA, right?

Yes, so did Nathan Deal. Though Deal also has the endorsement of GeorgiaCarry.org.

Sources:

http://www.nathandeal.org/v-2ndamend.php
http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/2010/10 ... ent-lists/
http://www.nrapvf.org/upcoming-elections/Georgia.aspx

I'll see what I can find. You don't have to be pro gun to get an "A" from the NRA.

I know which of the two organizations above I trust more :righton:

 

[ookoshi]

The NRA uses ridiculous criteria to rate politicians. Anyone who was following SB-308/291 through the General Assembly knows that a lot of the NRA"s "pro-gun" politicians are really anti-gun and try to get the bill sunk in committee, where votes are not recorded, and then will vote YEA out on the floor because they know the NRA is watching.

If the NRA actually took the time to send reps to attend committee meetings and see how these people really do in terms of gun bills, there would be a lot more positive change in regards to gun rights.

Of course, that would mean that the NRA actually cared about winning the fight, instead of just prolonging the fight for fundraising purposes.

 

[seajay]

I can't remember the bill number but in 2001 or 2002 he did block the the bill that would have allowed restaurant carry. He also pushed through HB 385 (The Roy Barns is "God" bill) which allowed the Governor to seize control of firearm (and other items) sales and transportation (Code Section 38-3-51). The same law we have been trying to overturn for years. No I can't find proof of this but it has to be out there someplace. I'm just going from memory. There were others in the first 2 years as well he either had blocked in the senate or just vetoed them. Most people here were not as involved with this gun thing as I was so they may not remember but I sure do. No one wanted HB 385 to pass and it had all but failed untill good ol' Roy went to the House and the Senate and did some arm twisting to get it ramed down our throats. All the while telling us we were not responsible enough to defend ourselves in restaurants that served alcohol with a meal. Pro gun? Not Roy Barns...

 

[ookoshi]

It's not often seajay and I agree, but in this case he's right. Roy Barnes is definitely not pro-gun. Now, I do believe that GCO is strong enough to prevent Roy from getting any anti-gun legislation through, but he's pretty much going to veto any pro-gun bills we pass.

Deal would definitely be MUCH better for us in terms of getting 2A legislation through.

 

[GAGunOwner]

It's not often seajay and I agree, but in this case he's right. Roy Barnes is definitely not pro-gun. Now, I do believe that GCO is strong enough to prevent Roy from getting any anti-gun legislation through, but he's pretty much going to veto any pro-gun bills we pass.

Deal would definitely be MUCH better for us in terms of getting 2A legislation through.

But we should all go vote for Monds right? :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[seajay]

It's not often seajay and I agree, but in this case he's right. Roy Barnes is definitely not pro-gun. Now, I do believe that GCO is strong enough to prevent Roy from getting any anti-gun legislation through, but he's pretty much going to veto any pro-gun bills we pass.

Deal would definitely be MUCH better for us in terms of getting 2A legislation through.

But we should all go vote for Monds right? :roll: :roll: :roll:

You should vote the way you feel would be the best for you and not someone else.

 

[mpc]

I'll see what I can find. You don't have to be pro gun to get an "A" from the NRA.

In fact, being pro gun may be a strike against the candidate.

 

[mark5019]

Roy Barnes got an "A" rating from the NRA, right?
Didn't I just see that in my latest American Rifleman?
So how could he get top marks from the NRA if he has a proven track record of vetoing pro-gun bills?
Do you have any bill numbers we can look up, or newspaper articles to link to, showing such a veto, or quoting him with those anti-gun remarks?

the nra endorsed harry ried

 

[Adam5]

You should vote the way you feel would be the best for you and not someone else.

:exactly:

We all have our reasons for voting the way we do. Some of us may vote for who GCO endorses because GCO endorses them, some of us may vote for who the NRA endorses because the NRA endorses them, some vote our hearts, some vote our minds, some vote the lesser of two evils. You have to research all the candidates and vote for the candidate that YOU feel is best for the job and best represents your thoughts and position on issues.

We can sit here and argue until our fingers hurt from typing too much and I doubt we will sway each other to change our minds on who to vote for.

 

[MikeDAbiker]

If you have lived over 10 years in Georgia or not, some of us old folks remember prior Guvnas. Whether right or wrong - their voting 'record' is my voting decision point.

Go to the Georgia General Assembly website for some facts: http://www.legis.state.ga.us/links/Prev.htm

What ever we do, we are the product of our 'own' decisions.

 

[Montieth]

We can sit here and argue until our fingers hurt from typing too much and I doubt we will sway each other to change our minds on who to vote for.

The point of discussion is to express facts and opinions and perhaps sway views. There's been some nice concrete facts presented here which is the point of my asking the above question.

I don't see a problem yet with the thread. I'm trying to get as much concrete data as possible so when I go tap the little touch screen I know I'm voting with some hard data and not just some vague recollections, recent press claims, mud slinging ads and what I've been able to find on Thomas.loc.gov on Deal's record as a congressman.

Deal was a Democrat as of 1995 so basing any decision just on party makes no sense. I prefer to see concrete facts and positions about the candidates. Recent claims by the candidates are just noise to me frankly.

I'm seeing good info here. Please keep it up.

 

[ookoshi]

I have changed my vote on some offices because of debates on the internet before. It's rare, but sometimes people actually bring good arguments that are well sourced.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

Get it back on topic if you are going to post. Read the original post. Respond to it. Forget the distractions.