Menu Content/Inhalt

What is this?

Dem Gubernatorial Candidates ''Face Off'' ...on gun rights PDF Print E-mail
Written by Jeff Garvas   
Friday, 07 October 2005

The Cleveland Jewish News recently covered a "face off" between US Representative Ted Strickland and Columbus Mayor Mike Coleman. The "forum" was sponsored by the National Jewish Democratic Council and held last week in the Cleveland area.

Reading the article makes it sound like the "Face off" was more of a Democrat pep rally, until the two candidates reached the issue of gun control.

At that point, the difference between the two candidates became crystal clear.

(Click 'READ MORE' to continue)

From the story:
The single issue on which Coleman and Strickland disagreed was gun control. After Columbus enacted a citywide ban on assault weapons, the National Rifle Association canceled plans to hold its 2007 national convention there.

“We’re not going to be blackmailed by the NRA,” Coleman said he told the powerful gun lobby. “AK-47s are made to shoot people, not deer.”

Strickland noted that the NRA has always supported him. He voted against a 1994 anti-crime bill, because it contained a ban on assault weapons.

Few Americans noticed any difference in their safety when the ban on assault weapons expired a year ago, Strickland said.

However, he maintained that the passage of that law cost the Democrats their majority in the House of Representatives. “For 10 years, Democrats haven’t been able to assert their views (in Congress),” he said.

“I think other issues are more important.”
The 2006 Gubernatorial elections will have a huge role on the lives of gun owners over the next eight years, as concealed carry reform and other gun rights issues come to the table in the General Assembly.

For years we've watched as liberal candidates for office like Mayor Mike Coleman have said things like "We’re not going to be blackmailed by the NRA", and it is refreshing to see that someone like US Representative Ted Strickland isn't changing his position, but using his long-term support of gun rights to stand up to Mayor Coleman's hyperbole.

The question is, could Ted Strickland win in a race against Ken Blackwell or Petro? Gun owners have a very tricky decision to make, depending upon the outcome of the 2006 primary elections.

When it comes to Mayor Mike Coleman its liberal anti-gun mantra over and over again, ignoring the harsh reality that even Strickland admits: anti-gun positions made the democrats lose their majority in Congress.

The National Rifle Association never blackmailed Mayor Coleman or the City of Columbus when they moved the NRA Convention, they reacted to the actions of an anti-gun city council that passed meaningless legislation that would have ruined the convention.

Coleman paid millions of dollars in lost revenue for local businesses and lost tax revenue when he signed a law that told the NRA to leave Columbus. Columbus residents should boot him out of office just as swiftly.

On one hand you have a liberal anti-gun democrat, and on the other you have a proven gun rights supporter who hasn't onced tried to claim support for so called "reasonable" gun control.

There is nothing reasonable about gun control when the sole purpose is to control people, who do nothing wrong, and their right to own a n otherwise legal product.

Democrats should realize that Strickland sees the bigger picture and isn't getting hung up on partisan anti-gun mantra. He even goes so far as to point out how pointless the Assault Weapons ban really was, and now is, in Columbus.

Kudos to Ted Strickland for not sacrificing his morals and his position, and for wearing his NRA favorable history proudly.