I wish I had a transcript, but this is what I recall.
He said he supported gun control in New York City because when he became mayor the murder rate was about 2,600 a year, and by confiscating guns from criminals, the murder rate dropped to about 600 a year.
He said he thought the gun issues in a crowded major metropolitan area were different than gun issues in rural or suburban areas.
He said he thought that individual states should decide for themselves what works best for them.
Parenthetically, let me mention the fact that Reagan, Rudy's old boss, supported the Brady Bill.
I know people who think the right to bear arms entitles them to own tanks and cannons and other major ordinance! Maybe even some of the Freepers who condemn Giuliani.
It's not like he was soothing his constituents, he was outright aggressive against the RKBA.
I know people who think the right to bear arms entitles them to own tanks and cannons and other major ordinance! Maybe even some of the Freepers who condemn Giuliani.
CobaltBlueStater - Who said anything about TANKS and CANNONS Buffy? Gun control means no itsey-bitsy little 38's or 22's. Either it is a Constitutional Right to be able to Bear an Arm, or it is not. Major Cities that restricting Guns also have the highest crime rates. Check for yourself before you deprive me of my Rights!
When the Brady Bill was introduced Reagan was senile.
"He said he thought the gun issues in a crowded major metropolitan area were different than gun issues in rural or suburban areas.
He said he thought that individual states should decide for themselves what works best for them.
He said he thought that individual states should decide for themselves what works best for them.
Parenthetically, let me mention the fact that Reagan, Rudy's old boss, supported the Brady Bill. "
Unparanthetically, let me mention that Rudy said he supported the Brady bill because it gave him tools useful in NYC.
This contradicted the thing he said immediately prior about preferring local laws, as Brady imposed the same draconian, stupid rules on all of us. Besides, I disagree with the idea that just because one is unfortunate enough to live in a high population density area that one is thereby not really eligible to exercise the right of self-defense.
Then, unfortunately, Sean elected to just let that one go whereas if his interviewee had been a (D) candidate he would have pursued the subject.
I am not opposed to Rudy's candidacy but I was *very* disappointed by this part of the interview -- by both Sean and Rudy.
I can appreciate Rudy for strongly preferring constructionist judges and still be upset by his (IMO) lousy position on 2A. It's an important factor. If, in 2009, we have Rudy and a Republican congress, nothing will result from it. If we have Rudy and a Democrat congress, he'd probably sign any gun control bill the Dims pass.
I'm sorry but my rights noted in the BOR do not depend on where I live. I suppose if you live in NYC you would think it good if they denied you freedom of religion? That is a nonsense unconstitutional argument you put out there. I would not want someone with your trashing of the Constitution in elected office.