1. Repeals the D.C. gun ban?

   I would follow the recommendation of the DC city council.

   
   
2. Removes burdensome restrictions that are discouraging pilots from getting trained and deputized as armed fight deck officers?

   You do not detail what those burdensome restrictions are, and the pilot we talked to, who carries a gun on-board, says the only restrictions he is aware of is that you have to prove periodically that you know how to shoot the gun. So I am unable to answer this question.

   
   
3. Repeals the gun free school zones ban?

   This question is unclear, and the response complicated. I can see restrictions on guns on public school property - except that, here in Maine, with a solid hunting tradition, I don't think teens with hunting licenses should be arrested because they have a rifle in the trunk of their car so they can go hunting on the way home from school. This needs to be a localized decision, not a federal one.

   
   
4. Protects the right of individuals to use deadly force in defending self and family from violent assault - both in or away from home?

   This right already exists

   
   

1. Bans .50 caliber firearms?

   YES

   
   
2. b) Increases the amount of time that the FBI can retain the names of gun owners, pursuant to the Instant Check?

   YES

   
   
3. Reauthorizes the 1994 law, which sunset in 2004, that banned certain magazines and many types of semi-automatic firearms (commonly referred to as "assault weapons")?

   YES

   
   
4. Requires background checks on private firearms transactions at gun shows?

   NO

   
   
5. Adds mental health data to the instant background check system which screens potential gun buyers?

   NO

   
   
6. Expands the definition of "armor piercing" ammunition to cover hunting ammunition?

   Question is unclear, unable to answer

The Justice Department reported in 1989 that, "Any system that requires a criminal history record check prior to purchase of a firearm creates the potential for the automated tracking of individuals who seek to purchase a firearm." This means that any background check - whether an "instant check" or otherwise - can result in a registration list of gun owners.

1. Would you support a repeal of the 1993 Brady instant check?

   NO

   
   
2. If yes, would you introduce legislation repealing this Act?

   NA

   
   
3. If no to 3B, would you cosponsor such legislation?

   NA

   
   

NO
If no, what type(s)? NA

In 1996, Congress enacted a gun ban known as the Lautenberg Domestic Misdemeanor Gun Ban. Because this ban covers misdemeanors, it disarms otherwise law-abiding citizens for life - for offenses as slight as spanking a child or grabbing a spouse's wrist.

1. Would you support a repeal of the Lautenberg Domestic Gun Ban?

   NO

   
   
2. If yes, would you introduce legislation repealing this Act?

   NA

   
   
3. If no to 5B, would you cosponsor such legislation?

   NA

   
   

1. Would you support reciprocity legislation which would allow a person who has the right to carry a concealed weapon in his or her home state to have the right to carry in other states?

   YES, if the regulations for getting a concealed weapon permit are essentially identical in all the reciprocal states.

   
   
2. If yes, would you cosponsor legislation protecting this right?

   YES

   
   

1. requiring trigger locks to be sold with every retail handgun;

   NO

   
   
2. requiring firearms intended for self-protection to be locked up when they are not in use?

   "IN USE" is too vague a term for me to respond to this question.

   
   
3. requiring gun makers to install so-called "smart gun" technology into the firearms they make?

   NO

   
   

Many states and localities have taken gun makers and dealers to court in an attempt to blame them for the actions of criminals. With this in mind, would you agree or disagree with the following statement: Persons who are shot by a properly-working firearm should not be able to sue firearms manufacturers and/or firearms sellers (strict liability).

AGREE

Congress has consistently funded the We the People civics curriculum, which is currently being taught in all 435 congressional districts. Among its many problems, We the People denigrates the Second Amendment and the Constitution, while heralding the United Nations and its charter. With this in mind, would you vote to end all taxpayer subsidies of this anti-gun curriculum?

Send me the curriculum, and I will look at it. Cannot otherwise respond.

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett has introduced legislation that would remove the free speech restrictions on advocacy groups like GOA, enabling such groups to discuss the voting records of members of Congress right up to an election. Would you support legislation to protect the free speech rights of pro-gun organizations?

YES, for all groups, not just pro-gun organizations. But it needs to be accompanied by full and public disclosure of these groups finances, including major donors, and special interest connections, similar to what campaigns have to report. We need more public disclosure of who these groups are, where the money comes from and where it goes.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) has offered legislation to cut off U.S. funds to the United Nation's educational organization (U.N.E.S.C.O.). Paul has stated that since its inception, U.N.E.S.C.O. has been "openly hostile" to American values, our Constitution and our Bill of Rights (especially the Second Amendment). Would you support similar legislation to cut off funds to this anti-gun organization?

NO

While Gun Owners of America closely tracks legislation that directly affects the Second Amendment rights of all Americans, there are also other issues which impact these same freedoms. With this in mind, would you agree or disagree with the following statements:

1. Congress should not pass legislation which lacks authority under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution

   DISAGREE

   
   
2. Because a Supreme Court decision does not mean that an issue has been settled as the law of the land, Congress can pass legislation that disagrees with an unconstitutional ruling.

   DISAGREE. Under our Constitution it is the job of the Supreme Court to determine if legislation is constitutional or unconstitutional. Congress can pass any legislation it wants, but the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of whether that legislation survives constitutional muster.

   
   
3. Individual Congressmen should oppose any effort to add or increase existing federal penalties on most violent criminals, because of the premise that under the Constitution, most crimes are to be punished by state authority.

   DISAGREE