Robert Pittenger on Gun Control

Defend Second Amendment Rights

The Pittenger Pledge
• Prioritize America's defense and security in budgeting and not allow cuts to fund a welfare state.
• Stand for the "rule of law" in all immigration policies.
• Protect our borders, recognizing that security threats can exist from porous borders.
• Defend 2nd Amendment Rights.

Opposes restrictions on gun purchases.

Project Vote Smart infers candidate issue stances on key topics by summarizing public speeches and public statements. Congressional candidates are given the opportunity to respond in detail; about 11% did so in the 2012 races.

Project Vote Smart summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: 'Guns: Do you support restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns?'

Interstate transportation of firearms is federally prote.

Congressional Summary: On interstate transportation of firearms or ammunition:

• Require that a firearm and ammunition shall be in a locked container.
• Does not permit transportation of firearms or ammunition with the intent to commit a crime.
• Prohibits detention of a person for violation of any local gun law unless there is probable cause.

Supporters reasons for voting YEA: (NRA Institute for Legal Action, 1/16/15): Current federal law guarantees the right of law-abiding persons to transport firearms, regardless of state or local laws. Unfortunately, anti-gun local officials are using overly restrictive state licensing laws to harass and prosecute travelers who have made every effort to comply with the law, resulting in seized guns and sometimes arrests. HR 131 would make clear that I, including activities incidental to the trip such as temporary lodging.

Opponents reasons for voting NAY: (PopVox blog postings on HR 131):

• CA-19: I oppose HR131 because it is overly burdensome on law abiding individuals and attempts to fix an issue that is not documented to be a problem or responsible for any amount of crime today.
• SD-0: I oppose HR131 because this encourages illegal hunting. Gun laws already differ in each state. The last thing we want is increase of breaching of laws as one is "unaware" of the law of that state.
• AZ-5: I oppose HR131 because travelling can be dangerous. A firearm is useless for defense if it is locked in a box.
• MO-7: I oppose HR131 because it attempts to once again federally mandate a standard across all states which poses as a protection to gun owners, but could be abused by law enforcement.
• NH-2: I oppose HR131 because this is not only unnecessary, but impractical in many situations. We already have more than enough poorly constructed firearms laws on the books.