Corbett and Onorato on Gun Control

The difference could not be more stark, which is why we need to make sure Corbett gets elected. Corbett is correct as a matter of law. His office has an affirmative duty under the law to sign reciprocity agreements, and the law does not provide for the Attorney General to make distinction between resident and non-resident permits.

“This is a real problem in Pennsylvania,” Onorato said. “Tom Corbett is running for governor. If he thinks this was just a 30-second sound-bite in June, then he has another think coming.”

Corbett’s campaign in June derided the loophole issue as a “solution in search of a problem” and said Onorato could not point to a serious crime having been committed by a Pennsylvanian with a Florida permit.

Go ahead Onorato. Let’s make this an issue. While I’m pleased Corbett is way ahead in polling, I’d like that lead to open up wider, and for the Democratic Party to be proven wrong, in a big way, that the gun vote can’t hurt you in Pennsylvania. Corbett has actually locked up straw purchasers in Philadelphia, which is more than that city ever did. What has Onorato accomplished? What has Lentz accomplished? Other than beating this dead horse of an issue.

5 thoughts on “Corbett and Onorato on Gun Control”

  1. It’s kind of telling that Onorato doesn’t ever make use of the word “Democrat” in his TV advertising. The way he’s positioning himself, you’d think he was the tea party candidate.

  2. I’ll never understand the Democrat’s pathological need to try to disarm me. Gun control is never a winning issue. Bill Clinton said so in 1994. Al Gore said it lost him the presidency in 2000. I could add Mike Castle’s name to the list in 2010.

    If Onorato, Lentz or Sestak had ANY brains they wouldn’t even mention gun control….but that would make sense. I have often thought that the origins of the Democrat’s obsession with disarming the citizenry comes from their elitist attitudes. Only elites like them should be able to own or carry guns. Low life slobs (read: their constituents) are too stupid and need to have this right restricted.

  3. I think Ed Rendell has convinced the state party that NRA has no juice in Pennsylvania, using his election, and re-election as a prime example. I would also note that Gore won Pennsylvania, Kerry won Pennsylvania, and Obama won Pennsylvania. This is probably not lost on the state party, including Rendell.

    Pennsylvania gun owners have made a pretty good case they’ll vote for anti-gun Democrats. I know plenty do. When you break it down, that group cares more about who their unions tell them to vote for than they do about their gun rights.

    Of course, there are plenty of union voters who know better, and that’s hurt the Dems. The problem is, it hasn’t hurt them enough.

  4. Rendell hasn’t exactly done a whole lot to promote the gun-control agenda over the last 8 years. He can say that the NRA doesn’t have any clout but he appears to tread very lightly around this issue. He is afraid of pissing them off. Pennsylvania is a blue state but we are a pro-gun blue state. Mention guns once too often and even the drone union members start to take notice.

    I would like nothing more than to see the scalps of Dan Onorato, Bryan Lentz & Joe Sestak hanging from the walls of NRA headquarters this fall.

  5. I think the issue is that Pennsylvania gun owners are a force to be reckoned with if compelled to action, but it takes quite a bit to bring them out in large numbers, or to convince them to change their voting habits… and a lot of Pennsylvania gun owners are Democrats.

Comments are closed.