Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Did Snyder Really Veto A "Pro 2nd Amendment" Bill?

Anti-Snyder Republicans like to claim that Governor Snyder vetoed a bill that was very "Pro 2nd Amendment" in December of 2012, shortly after the Newtown, CT shooting that shocked the nation.

Was the bill really all that "pro 2nd Amendment?"

It doesn't seem to be.

The bill, SB59, would have required individuals who can already open carry in certain places to be forced to get a concealed-carry permit just to continue doing what they're already doing.

How is a bill that requires more government red tape "pro 2nd Amendment?" I don't understand that.

Controversial former Mayor of NYC Michael Bloomerg has endorsed Snyder, but that is because of his advocacy for strong legal immigration, and charter schools-it has nothing to do with SB 59.

Writing about the upcoming ads Bloomberg's PAC is doing for Snyder, the Detroit News wrote:

"A male narrator in Independence USA’s ad declares Michigan is “coming back” and that Snyder is “the governor who put partisanship aside, made the hard decisions and delivered results.”

The ad’s narrator also touts “higher graduation rates, more school funding” and more public charter schools under Snyder’s watch.

As mayor of New York, Bloomberg advocated for the expansion of charter schools to infuse competition into the city’s traditional school system.

In 2011, Snyder signed a law that allowed universities to charter more schools in the past three years before lifting Michigan’s cap on charter schools completely in 2015."

Some claim that:

"Ultimately, Gov. Rick Snyder decided to veto SB 59.  He didn't veto it because he's so pro-gun he opposed making it illegal to open carry in a 28.425o zone, no...not at all.  In fact, that language was added to the legislation at the Governor's insistence."

However, there is absolutely no evidence Snyder interfered in any way. In fact, Snyder has been a friend to gun owners, signing into law protections for gun-owners against media FOIA requests that could put their home address online.

"Gun owners’ information should be protected from unscrupulous media organizations that print personal information in an effort to ostracize law-abiding individuals who are simply exercising a constitutional right," said Chris W. Cox, Executive Director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action.

Collectively, the Firearms Records Confidentiality Package requires that information submitted to the government for purposes of firearms licensing, registration and concealed carry permitting be confidential and not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

"On behalf of the NRA's five million members, I would like to thank Governor Snyder...for ensuring that law-abiding gun owners are protected from unwarranted scrutiny and discrimination merely for exercising their fundamental, constitutional right to Keep and Bear Arms," concluded Cox.

Rick Snyder has been a strong advocate for Michigan gun owners, especially in a "blue state" like Michigan.

That's why he wasn't just endorsed by Bloomberg, he was also endorsed by his heated rivals, the NRA... And to think! Susan Demas said Snyder isn't a moderate! :)


  1. No evidence huh?

    Did you even look? Just read his veto letter:,4668,7-277-57577_57657-291588--,00.html

    You can't try to undermine preemption and still be considered a friend to gun owners. All real gun owners understand that preemption is sacrosanct.

  2. "The bill, SB59, would have required individuals who can already open carry in certain places to be forced to get a concealed-carry permit just to continue doing what they're already doing."

    *sigh* Next time I suggest taking a bit more time to understand what you are writing about first.

    SB 59 would have allowed concealed carry (CC) in the CC prohibited places (28.425o) with an "enhanced" CPL. It would have also prohibited open carry (OC) in those places, which was was seen as a tenuous legal interpretation at the time. Why the outlaw? Because SNYDER demanded it. Then he demanded more and then he demanded the undermining of preemption. Snyder did nothing for gun owners when it came to SB 59 and ultimately vetoed the legislation when he didn't get 100% of his way.

    And just in case you want to give him credit for something, it doesn't work that way. You can't demand more taxes, veto a bill because it doesn't raise taxes enough, and then try to claim credit for not raising taxes.

  3. So, why no byline?

    I just can't tell if this is ignorance or deceit.