|
|
 |
|
|
|
Results ...
|
|
Candidate Questionnaires & Ratings
|
|
Questionnaire
We recently mailed a candidate questionnaire to every declared and filed candidate for the Arizona state legislature. The questionnaire contained the following five questions, which we asked the candidates to answer either “Yes” or “No”:
- Q1 - Law-abiding citizens have the right to carry a weapon, with or without a government issued permit, in any place that they have a right to be.
- Q2 - Trained, law-abiding adult citizens have the right to carry their weapons onto the grounds of schools, colleges and universities in order to be able to protect themselves and others from criminals.
- Q3 - Law-abiding citizens have the right to carry a weapon into a restaurant with them while they dine, whether or not the establishment happens to serve alcohol for consumption on the premises.
- Q4 - Article 2, Section 26 of the Arizona Constitution means what it says. Our right to bear arms must not be subject to local laws.
- Q5 - Law-abiding citizens who are forced to use a weapon in self-defense should be presumed innocent of any wrongdoing unless proven otherwise by the state, and should also be free from any retaliatory civil suits by the criminal or his family/estate.
We explained in a covering letter that we feel that no one should need to beg to exercise a Constitutionally protected right, and that these issues need no further debate. They could feel free to mail us an expanded explanation of their response if they so desired. However, what we perceive as a “Yes, but…” answer would be treated as a “No” when we shared their response. An unchecked “Yes” box would also be treated as a “No.” An unreturned questionnaire would result in the answers to all questions to be considered as “No.”
They were told that their responses to the Candidate Questionnaire would be shared with our membership and made available to the estimated one-plus million gun owners in Arizona, and passed along to the various national firearms related pro-rights organizations. It would be posted on our web site and in our newsletter. They were also informed that until we received their response, and absent any information to the contrary, we would assume a “No” answer to all our survey questions.
The responses reproduced here are those that we have received to this point. We will continue to update this page periodically as more responses come in. As noted, until we receive a response, and absent any information we have to the contrary, we will assume all answers to all questions to be “No”. The candidates have now had several days to respond to a very simple and brief questionnaire, one that fit on a postcard, and had return postage and a return address provided for them. If this has proven to be too difficult a task to complete, we welcome suggestions for making it easier.
|
|
Ratings
The ratings provided are subjective, and are based on several factors, all of which are taken into consideration before publication. For all candidates, their responses to the aforementioned candidate survey are considered, as well as public statements they have made concerning our rights in general, our rights to keep and bear arms specifically, their known stands on public policy issues, etc. Information from our membership, and their interaction with the candidates, is also a strong factor. For candidates who already hold elective office, their voting record in previous sessions is also taken into consideration. This includes recorded votes as well as standing voice votes, committee votes, etc. Their interaction with our liaisons at the state capitol, and the knowledge that our liaisons have of them, and the candidates’ support, or lack thereof, of our legislative agenda, is likewise considered.
A “+” rating is considered pro-rights. These are people we can typically count on to vote with us when bills that concern us are on the agenda in the legislature. An “=” rating is considered neutral. These people may or may not vote our way, they may leave the floor during important votes, the may vote against us during voice votes and then vote for us during recorded votes, or they may even work behind the scenes to prevent bills we favor from getting a vote at all. You can never tell where these people are going to come down. A “-” rating is considered anti-rights. These are people who will typically vote against us when bills we favor are up for a vote.
As with everything in life, nothing is set in stone. There will be occasions when a “+” rated person will vote against us, and occasions when a “-” rated person will vote with us. However, the ratings can serve as a general guide to help you determine where support for and opposition to our issues will lie. We hope you find them helpful.
|
|
Results ...
|
|
|
|
