Update: Please read comments below for more about Daniel Merritt’s(?) bizarre Twitter responses.
COVID-19. There; I said it. The obligatory mention is out of the way. Now on to reality.
For once, I decided to look at issues closer to home. Specifically, the Second Amendment positions of all the candidates for my Congressional district, Georgia-01. Three Democrats and three Republicans, including the incumbent, have filed to run. I reached out to all via email.
All were asked a basic set of generalized questions, and some were also given individualized questions based on statements they have made.
What “gun control” laws would you support?
What “gun control” laws would you repeal?
Do you have a position on:
a. “Red flag” laws.
b. Universal background checks.
c. Age limits for firearm possession.
d. So-called “assault weapons.”
e. National Firearms Act of 1934.
f. New machine gun ban provision of Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.
Democrats
No response.
Lisa Ring
Also asked:
I also note that you wish to separately require “universal background checks,” and “end the gun show loophole. What do you believe to be the “gun show loophole”?
How will you make criminals conduct “universal background checks” on the unlawful transactions that are how 96% (theft, black market, friends and family) of guns used in crimes are obtained?
No response.
No response.
Republicans
Earl “Buddy” Carter (Incumbent)
No response.
Danny Merritt
Also asked:
“We must do a better job of enforcing current laws, especially background checks, so that guns stay out of the wrong hands.”
What specifically would you do to “do a better job” of enforcing background checks?
Merritt’s campaign manager, Jeanne Seaver, replied.
We would like to request a meeting to address your questions face to face.
I took that as an attempt to avoid answering until he could “feel me out” in person to decide what answers I wanted, rather than to go out on a limb by stating a real position. I pointed out that COVID-19 was already in the wild in Georgia and I preferred to limit in-person contacts. I also noted that emailed answers would avoid potential transcription errors, if I had to work from written notes and a recording. Seaver responded to that.
Understood. If you would like to Danny directly via telephone, let us know and we can set it up.
They still didn’t want to get pinned down in writing. At last, I received an email with the subject “Behind the 2nd Amendment 100%.” The entirety of the message was this.
Believe there are ample laws on the books and we should focus on enforcing them.
No specific question was addressed. I don’t even know if that statement is from the candidate, or is the manager’s summary of his “position.”
Ken Yasger
Also asked:
“Why does someone need an assault rifle? […] The answer is simple, they abide by the laws and the Second Amendment gives them the right.”
Based on that statement, will you support repealing the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the new machine gun ban provision of the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986?
The question was intended to highlight his use of the term “assault rifle” and to discover if he was misusing it, as I suspect.
No response.
The candidates were asked these questions weeks before our region began locking down, closing offices. There is no reason for their lack of response.
It is inexcusable. At a time when the Democrats are pushing victim disarmament monstrosities like HR 5717, it is imperative that Americans know exactly where their would-be representatives stand on the Second Amendment. For those short-sighted enough to not particularly care about that, a stated position on the 2A is still a good litmus test for the candidates’ respect — or lack of — for rights generally.
But maybe it doesn’t really matter. Georgia’s governor has already “postponed” elections… again.
[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]
(More Tip Jar Options) |
