Montana Governor Steve Bullock and His Flip Flopping

Montana Flag NRA-ILA
Montana Governor Steve Bullock (D) has been very active during the long 2020 campaign season. IMG NRA-ILA

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Montana Governor Steve Bullock (D) has been very active during the long 2020 campaign season.  First, in May of 2019, he jumped into the race to be the Democrat nominee to face off against President Donald Trump (R) this November.  After several months, however, and failing to break 1% of support in any national polls, he jumped back out of the race in December 2019.

Then, after repeatedly stating for months that he would not challenge incumbent U.S. Senator Steve Daines (R) this November, he reversed course in March of this year, and decided to enter that race.  This came, reportedly, after being pressured by New York Senator Charles Schumer (D) and former President Barack Obama (D).  These two anti-gun Democrat leaders seem to have been able to convince Bullock that flip-flopping on his promise to not challenge Daines would be key to their party taking control of the U.S. Senate.

Jumping into, then out of one race, then flip-flopping on a pledge to not run for another race.  We sure hope Bullock stretched before undertaking all of these political gymnastics.

But the activities he has undertaken on these races pales in comparison to the contortions he is trying to make to convince Montana voters he isn’t simply another potential cog in Schumer’s anti-gun machine.

NRA, of course, has long known Bullock is anti-gun.  Throughout his two terms as governor, he vetoed a number of pro-gun bills.  He twice vetoed bills that would allow the use of lawfully-possessed suppressors when hunting.  Suppressors are perfectly legal to use when hunting in many U.S. states, as well as many other countries where they are sometimes required; this includes countries with very restrictive gun laws.  It is often considered to be more “polite” to use suppressors, and, in fact, some European countries allow anyone who may lawfully purchase or possess a firearm to buy a suppressor over the counter.  They do not require the same bureaucratic machinations as are the law of the land here in the US.

Eventually, after facing a great deal of pressure from NRA members in Montana, Bullock relented, and signed a bill allowing the use of suppressors while hunting.  The legislation he eventually signed was less clear and concise than the NRA-supported legislation he vetoed, but the result was much the same.  Now, Montana’s hunters who wish to protect their hearing by using suppressors will have that option.

Bullock also vetoed a number of bills that sought to expand the right to carry a firearm for personal protection, including one that simply sought to allow law-abiding Montanans to carry a firearm on their person while in a restaurant where alcohol is NOT the primary item of sale.  Apparently, if you take your family to the local Applebee’s in Montana, Bullock feels your right to self-defense should end at the door.

Then there’s his support for bans.

Prior to declaring as a candidate for president, he went on record to state support for banning many semi-automatic firearms, claiming they “are not used for self-defense.”  Millions of law-abiding gun owners would strongly disagree with this ridiculous view, including some who have even testified before Congress to contradict Bullock.

As a candidate, he not only stood by this fallacious position but specifically stated support for legislation like Senator Dianne Feinstein’s (D) semi-auto ban bill.  This bill would not only ban countless firearms, but also standard capacity magazines.

Along with banning guns and magazines, presidential-candidate Bullock also wrote an Op-Ed in support of outlawing the private transfer of firearms through so-called “universal” background checks and promoted extreme “red flag” laws that ignore due process.

Now, as Bullock runs for U.S. Senate in what is a very pro-gun state, he wants potential voters to forget his anti-gun views.

In a recent campaign ad, the man who has supported gun bans and opposed efforts to expand the right to self-defense claims, “I believe in our individual right to arms.”  Perhaps he could elaborate in his next ad to explain which “arms,” and for what purpose.

The ad depicts him in hunting scenarios and holding hunting rifles, so we can presume he may actually support ownership of some firearms used in hunting.  But that’s not really what the Second Amendment is all about.

In fact, the Second Amendment neither mentions hunting nor even remotely implies that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” can be parsed by politicians like Bullock to decide which “Arms” are suitable for hunting.

NRA clearly supports the fact that the protection of hunting and firearms for hunting is an obvious, and natural, extension of the Second Amendment.  But the primary reason for the Second Amendment is to protect the individual right to arms for self-defense and the defense of our “free State.”

If Bullock shared this view, he would probably mention the individual right to self-defense in his deceitful ad, rather than, when he was governor, veto bills that sought to expand where that right may be exercised.

Even his alleged support for hunting as protected by “our individual right to arms” doesn’t hold much water, considering many of the firearms he wants to see banned are commonly used for hunting.

Then again, Bullock never actually mentions the Second Amendment in his ad.  Perhaps that’s by design.  If he doesn’t mention the actual amendment, then maybe he feels he cannot be held accountable for misrepresenting it.

Ultimately, Steve Bullock is a confusing mess.  He’s running for president, then he’s not.  He states over and over that he won’t run for U.S. Senate, and then he does.  Now, he wants voters to believe he supports “our individual right to arms” while supporting banning “arms,” and after a well-documented history of vetoing legislation that sought to expand “our individual right to arms.”

The reality is, Bullock openly supports banning guns and magazines, has opposed expanding our right to self-defense, and follows the guidance of anti-gun politicians Chuck Schumer and Barack Obama.  None of that appears likely to change, in spite of his efforts to reinvent how he is perceived by Montanans.


National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

About NRA-ILA:

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

Subscribe
Notify of
18 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Roofuss
Roofuss
9 months ago

Bullock tried a half-assed run for the Democratic Presidential nomination last year, while he went traveling all over the country, at our expense. Then stuck Montana taxpayers with the $56K bill for state supplied security !!

PMinFl
PMinFl
9 months ago

Did Bullock abandon his current position as governor? I think it should be mandatory for any politician to resign from any elected position in order to seek another elected post. Should be a FEDERAL law.

Vern
Vern
9 months ago

Sounds like any other deceiver from the deceivercrat party. He doesn’t care about the rights of Americans, only communists.

Elisa Delaurenti
9 months ago

To get even more specific here…… during his time as Governor of Montana, Bullock vetoed EVERY serious legislature approved pro Second Amendment bill sent to his desk here. Sixteen bills in total that he vetoed after they were passed by both sides of our legislative body. He also refused to sign three more bills that included our Ammunition and Components Manufacturing bill, which not only provides for good jobs here in Montana, but ammunition security. Without ammunition, our guns become nothing more than clubs. We MUST secure our ammunition supply chain here in the U.S. We really need gun owners… Read more »

Roofuss
Roofuss
9 months ago

I live in Montana, and yes we do deserve better. But like some other conservative states, we’re being inundated with out of state liberals moving here. And with that, they want to make us just like the shit hole they left !!

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
9 months ago
Reply to  Roofuss

Amen to that. We have the same problem here in Oregone now and washington has had and colorado and texas have. It’s a dam shame. They are so stupid. They leave because they hate it and the first thing they try and do is make where they are like where they came from. It’s got to be a disease. I hate that I came from Kommiefornia but I had no choice where I was born. Portland has screwed Oregone up so bad that I am going to put in lettering on the back of my jeep when I go on… Read more »

Knute
Knute
9 months ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

Just like Brexit, it doesn’t matter what you vote for, the authorities will have their way with you… if they can. A rifle behind every bush is the only thing stopping them.

Vern
Vern
9 months ago
Reply to  Roofuss

One would think those who move to get away from the lack of intelligence where they were and gain the intelligence of where they moved to and the new freedoms they will be experiencing would leave the old ways behind.
Alas, they are so indoctrinated they don’t seem to have the capacity to gain new intelligence.

RoyD
RoyD
9 months ago
Reply to  Roofuss

I spent a week in Missoula this time last year and I saw the evidence of heavy liberal influence. Plus my older niece lives there and she is a liberal. Beautiful area around there but I couldn’t live there.

Roofuss
Roofuss
9 months ago
Reply to  RoyD

No bigger liberal thinking towns in Montana than Missoula , and Bozeman !! Sure can’t afford, and do want to, live in either of them. Cost of living is fast becoming like The Peoples Republik of Kalifornia ….Really sad !

Knute
Knute
9 months ago
Reply to  Roofuss

Esp. Missoula and the Kalispell/Colombia Falls/Whitefish “California Triangle” that native Montanans have now had to abandon. Living here in NE Montana, we locals see them moving here to get away from the ‘progressives’ that have done (and are still doing…) their best to destroy our natural wonders.
And Helena,OFC, but that is the way with all State Capitols. Everybody there works for the government, so it’s either sing their tune or starve. Or move, but few have the cajones for that…

TNJEWBOY
TNJEWBOY
9 months ago

Another gun grabber.
Piss on him.

uncle dudley
uncle dudley
9 months ago

How can any Montana firearms owner even think about voting for this guy, he will vote with the other anti-gun liberals in congress to take away freedoms.

Joe
Joe
9 months ago
Reply to  uncle dudley

RIGHT ON BROTHER !!

gregs
gregs
9 months ago

the only armshe and other leftists support bearing, is the long arm of the law when it comes to restricting our Second Amendment RIGHT. leftists never actually say what they mean, like obama saying he wants to fundamentally change America. do you think he would have won either of his campaigns if he said he wanted socialism here? leftists crave power to control other people, they all are wanna-be tyrants/dictators. just look at pelosi, whose staff called for the appointment to get her hair done and then blamed the salon owner for outing her hypocrisy. si vis pacem, para bellum.… Read more »

PakRat
PakRat
9 months ago

The lier will fit right in with Chuck and obama.
I bet he has ARMED body guards. If one will e safer without guns why does he need armed body guards ?
My personal opinion is the liberal politications are afraid of legally armed Patriots. If they are following the construction they have no reason to fear us. .

Vern
Vern
9 months ago
Reply to  PakRat

They fear anything they aren’t in control of, especially, the Constitution of the United States of America.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
9 months ago

I can’t believe there are more demonrats in montana than republicans. That is where I was going to move from Oregone since Governor Kate shit stain Brown is trying to make it like kommiefornia and washington but changed my mind because of the demonrat governor. I am looking at Wyoming and even more so South Dakota because of it.