Coalition for the Protection of Gun Rights (CPGR)- Endorsement vote!

[Potus]

Coalition for the Protection of Gun Rights

The CPGR is an advocacy organization founded to further the cause of gun rights and guarantee their protection. Although a national organization, the CPGR also works at the regional level to further the cause. To join the CPGR, simply post in this thread that you wish to become a member.

The CPGR will post regarding gun rights causes and legislation pertinent to the protection of gun rights. Atlasians everywhere have a right to bear arms. We'll be working to help elect pro-gun candidates all across the country from the lowly offices of the regional Legislatures to the President themselves. Our cause is good and our supporters are motivated. Let's go defend our rights.

Current Leadership

Governor Riley Keaton, President
Fmr. Speaker Deus, Northeast Chairman
Flo, Pacific Chairman

Members

TheRileyKeaton
Deus Naturae
Flo
Sjoycefla
Dallasfan65
SomebodyWhoExists
Tmthforu94
LumineVonReuental
Spiral
JoMCaR
coyolxauhqui
Maxwell
MadmanMotley
WrathofTheGods
JCL
Never Convinced
IBDDW
Rpryor3

Current Legislation:

Mideast Protecting the Right to Bear Arms Amendment- FOR
Senator Bore's The right not to get shot amendment - AGAINST

[Donerail]

I support this organization.

[Flake]

x Flo

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

XDallasfan65

[SWE]

X SomebodyWhoExists

[tmthforu94]

x Tmthforu94

[Lumine]

x LumineVonReuental

[Deus Naturae]

X Deus Naturae

[PPT Spiral]

x Spiral

[Potus]

A poll has been posted.

[Prince of Salem]

xJoMCaR

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

x coyolxauhqui

[MadmanMotley]

x MadmanMotley

[Barnes]

Not that I agree with this organization in the slightest, but having an active and vocal right-wing in the game will be very interesting!

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I support gun rights, but I have to admit I'd feel wary about joining this organization, given that I'm from Newtown.

Does the CPGR support universal background checks and age restrictions, or at the very least wouldn't spend all its resources defeating those proposals?

[Maxwell]

x Maxwell

[Potus]

I support gun rights, but I have to admit I'd feel wary about joining this organization, given that I'm from Newtown.

Does the CPGR support universal background checks and age restrictions, or at the very least wouldn't spend all its resources defeating those proposals?

Rather than get bogged down in positions on specific ideas, the CPGR will promote a big tent approach to supporting gun rights. My personal opinion, though, is that expanded background checks would not have prevented any of the tragedies anti-gun activists have turned into political assets. On the age restrictn, I say 18.

[Hatman 🍁]

Any member of this organization will not be getting a vote from me in any election.

[Flake]

Any member of this organization will not be getting a vote from me in any election.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would have some serious second thoughts. We have clip limits, a national licensing system for firearms, and a requirement that owners of weapons carry liability insurance. These regulations save lives and I do not want to see them threatened for the sake of someone's Rambo fantasy.

I'm for these regulations but I don't feel that we need any more. That's why I joined.

[Cincinnatus]

Any member of this organization will not be getting a vote from me in any election.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would have some serious second thoughts. We have clip limits, a national licensing system for firearms, and a requirement that owners of weapons carry liability insurance. These regulations save lives and I do not want to see them threatened for the sake of someone's Rambo fantasy.

I agree with this, but I do support the creation of this group, despite the motives of it.  If anything, as Barnes said, it would be nice to see these advocacy groups actually create a stronger focus on issues, and possibly facilitate more competition. 

[Gass3268]

Any member of this organization will not be getting a vote from me in any election.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would have some serious second thoughts. We have clip limits, a national licensing system for firearms, and a requirement that owners of weapons carry liability insurance. These regulations save lives and I do not want to see them threatened for the sake of someone's Rambo fantasy.

I'm for these regulations but I don't feel that we need any more. That's why I joined.

What is wrong with Bore's amendment?

Most developed countries have moved past the point where self-defense is a legitimate reason to own a weapon. Guns are for farmers, hunters, target shooters, and hobbyists. Not vigilantes and would-be revolutionaries who think they'll pull a Paris 1848 on Main Street.

Yeah, I don't see where the issue is here. Seems like a simple straight forward amendment.

[rpryor03]

x Rpryor03

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Any member of this organization will not be getting a vote from me in any election.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would have some serious second thoughts. We have clip limits, a national licensing system for firearms, and a requirement that owners of weapons carry liability insurance. These regulations save lives and I do not want to see them threatened for the sake of someone's Rambo fantasy.

Pretty much - I acknowledge that gun rights are there and not going anywhere - but the restrictions on ownership and use must be very very tight.

[Deus Naturae]

Any member of this organization will not be getting a vote from me in any election.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would have some serious second thoughts. We have clip limits, a national licensing system for firearms, and a requirement that owners of weapons carry liability insurance. These regulations save lives and I do not want to see them threatened for the sake of someone's Rambo fantasy.

I'm for these regulations but I don't feel that we need any more. That's why I joined.

What is wrong with Bore's amendment?

Most developed countries have moved past the point where self-defense is a legitimate reason to own a weapon. Guns are for farmers, hunters, target shooters, and hobbyists. Not vigilantes and would-be revolutionaries who think they'll pull a Paris 1848 on Main Street.

Yeah, I don't see where the issue is here. Seems like a simple straight forward amendment.

Well, yes, it is fairly simple. That isn't the issue. No one is saying that they don't understand the amendment. They disagree with its content, which has nothing to do with how simple or straightforward it is.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I support background checks, age restrictions, liability insurance and the registry (in some form). However, I don't think clip limits work because it is relatively easy to modify them and render the limits pointless anyway.

I would have to oppose bore's amendment.

I am generally reluctant to get involved in groups like this in my role as chairman of a big tent party, a stance I also took back when I was chairman off the RPP. Therefore I need to think about it.