Jim Martin Has a Big "But"

Constituent TD sent an inquiry to GA US Senate candidate Jim Martin:

Mr. Martin:

What is your position on the Second Amendment. Do you support Barack Obama's positions?

Specifically:
--"assault rifle ban"
--"concealment permits"
--"castle doctrine"
--handgun restrictions beyond those presently imposed by Georgia law
--over-regulation of gun shops based on proximity to schools and churches.
--increased Federal taxes on guns and ammunition
--banning of specific types of guns and ammunition

My wife and I wish to share your views with many of our gun-owning friends.

Thank you for your response.

That seems pretty respectful and straightforward, no?

Here's what he got back:

Thank you for your email and interest in Jim's position on the 2nd Amendment. Jim supports the 2nd Amendment and the right for law abiding citizens to bear arms. He does, however, believe there are some reasonable limitations that should be enforced so we can keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those with mental illness.

I encourage you to visit http://www.martinforsenate.com/ to learn more about Jim's positions on issues of importance to Georgians.

Best wishes,

Morgan Martin Walters

He believes in the Second Amendment but...

Come on, Morgan--a voting citizen writes you, he's respectful, he's specific...

Blowing him off like this is disrespectful and evasive. And it does not serve your candidate well, because, well, let me have Len Savage give it a try and I'll explain further if that doesn't work:

Mr. Jim Martin and Morgan Martin Walters:

I am perplexed by your statements reflected in the email attached below:

"Jim supports the 2nd Amendment and the right for law abiding citizens to bear arms. He does, however, believe there are some reasonable limitations that should be enforced so we can keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those with mental illness."

As someone who "spent the better part of a decade in Athens earning three degrees (a bachelor's degree and two law degrees)," you should know that criminals and persons mentally adjudicated are already prohibited from firearms ownership. If they are prohibited, how much more restriction can there be? Unless you consider restricting law-abiding citizens of Georgia as a form of "reasonable limitation"?

As a Georgia conservative, I am by no means pleased with Senator Chambliss. However, he is not seeking to impose restrictions on law abiding Georgia citizens from owning or purchasing firearms.

I would think the "gun free zone" tragedies where unarmed citizens were murdered in cold blood with no means of defense would have opened even the most liberal mind. Criminals by their very nature do not adhere to the law. Only law-abiding citizens follow the law. Any restriction on firearms ownership is tipping the scales of power in the criminals' behalf.

The DNC is not hiding the fact they want the "assault weapons" ban to be reinstated. That affects me. I don't wish for you or the DNC to make owning or purchasing a firearm any harder.

Perhaps you would be so kind as to answer TD's questions this time instead of dodging the issue?

Respectfully,

Len Savage

Nope, that didn't work either. Morgan has decided the best response is no response.

Bad choice, Morgan. Funny thing about unintended consequences. What you want to go away, and stay confined to a malcontent or two, is now part of the public discourse on your candidate's fitness as a respecter of rights.

Which is not that impressive, by the way:

Graded 'C' by the NRA in 2000 and 1998
2000: Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all state legislative candidates in 2000, the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund assigned Martin a grade of C (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).
1998: Based on a questionnaire and the votes that National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund considered to be the most important in 1998, they have assigned Martin a grade of C.

Here's the thing, Morgan--TD wanted to share Jim Martin's views with his "many...gun-owning friends," and now this is all he's got to give them. And I suspect it won't be too long before this gets picked up by other blogs, by Internet forums...

If you think that might not serve your guy well (36% seems kind of shaky, "surge" posturing notwithstanding, don't you think?) I'd be delighted to give you another crack at addressing the specifics. Feel free to send me a comprehensive reply and I'll be happy to present it here unedited and uncut.