Firearms Industry Warns: Giuliani No Friend to Gun Owners

National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) ^ | February 6, 2007 | Ted Novin

[300magnum]

NEWTOWN, Conn.—In response to New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's filing of a statement of candidacy with the Federal Election Commission yesterday, indicating that he would enter the 2008 presidential race as a Republican, the firearms industry's trade association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), reminded America's sportsmen and gun-enthusiasts of the former mayor's record of hostility toward firearms and gun-owners.

"Recent remarks indicate the mayor is attempting to camouflage his record on guns – a political maneuver now common for politicians seeking national office," said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.

In June of 2000, then New York City Mayor Giuliani became the lone Republican mayor to sue members of the firearms industry as part of a wave of lawsuits that began in the late 1990's by major metropolitan cities like Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington, DC, Philadelphia and San Francisco that sought to hold firearms manufactures responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms. The Giuliani lawsuit is still pending and being aggressively pursued by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Giuliani strongly opposed legislation blocking suits like the one he filed against members of the firearms industry. In 2005, President Bush signed legislation into law that barred such lawsuits after Congress, by a broad bipartisan margin, passed the bill. During the debate in Congress the Giuliani lawsuit was specifically referred to as an example of the kind of "junk" lawsuit the law is intended to stop.

"Giuliani's lawsuit may have gained him praise in Gotham, but will surely handicap him in the rest of the country, particularly during the southern primaries," predicted Keane.

More recently Giuliani's campaign has flipped-flopped on whether he continues his longstanding support for restoring the Clinton-era federal ban on some semi-automatic rifles based on cosmetic appearance. The so-called "assault weapons" ban sunset in 2004. Several studies including those by the Department of Justice and the Centers for Disease Control showed the ban had no impact on crime largely because the banned firearms were very rarely if ever used in crime. The ban had nothing to do with machine guns, which have remained heavily regulated since the early part of the last century.

According to the New York Post, Giuliani's political operative in New Hampshire, Wayne Semprini, "has been telling voters that the mayor will be an 'easy sell' - and that the ex-mayor 'satisfied' him that he won't support federal assault-weapons bans, as he has in the past." All the while Anthony Carbonetti, Giuliani's top advisor, has been telling New Yorkers "the mayor's position on this [the assault weapons ban] has not changed."

Commenting on this equivocation, Keane added, "You can't pretend to be a supporter of sportsmen and gun-owners in New Hampshire when you tried to sue the firearms industry out of existence in New York. Other politicians learned the hard way that sportsmen and gun-owners are a well-informed and highly motivated voting bloc. Former President Clinton in his memoirs admitted the gun issue cost Al Gore the White House, and Senator Kerry's ill-fated goose hunt cooked his presidential aspirations in 2004."

Formed in 1961, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is the trade association for the firearms industry. For more information, visit www.nssf.org.

[California Patriot]

Rudy was a mayor. He had a responsibility to make his city safe. While not all his ways of making the city safe were necessarily right, it does not make him a gun-grabber in the very different role of president. It doesn't matter what he thinks of the Second Amendment. What matters here are his positions on proposals to increase federal gun control, his views on federal versus state power, and what sorts of federal judges and justices he would appoint. Let's not insist that a candidate THINK exactly as we do. We need to focus on what he would be like as president and what impact he would have on the issues of concern to us. Which is a very different question.

[dirtboy]

Because a plurality of Republicans LIKE Rudy Giuliani and want to vote for him.

Oh, just wait until Rudy's views become more widely known. Methinks he's gonna have a very hard time running from his past.

[dynoman]

I wish Hannity has asked him about that.

It's possible he's changed his mind on that.

Overall I was impressed with the Rudy interview, I liked the fact that when asked about concealed carry he quoted the 2nd ammnedment, "right to bear arms".

Simple.

This is the reason I don't like concealed carry permits and do not have one, the right to bear arms uninfringed is already given in the second ammendment, no need to clutter it up with all sorts of other laws.

[Jack Black]

Personally, I will not vote for him because of this issue. If that contributes to John Edwards or Hillary being elected so be it. I'm not totally inflexible, but I'm not Gumby either. If the R's nominate someone who is an East Coast gun grabbing elitist I really would rather have my "do what we think is good for the children" medicine administered by the Donkey Presidentette.

[flashbunny]

Thanks for the quote!

[beltfed308]

It doesn't matter what he thinks of the Second Amendment.

Oh really now.Do you remember clintons executive orders such as the milsurp ban?

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Potential constitution party nominees: Jim Gilchrist, Jerome Corsi, Alan Keyes and Chuck Baldwin.

So you're already looking at the Constitution Party rather than working to elect a conservative in the GOP. This simply reveals your lack of confidence in the existing tier of conservative GOP presidential candidates.

[Brad from Tennessee]

Great quotes. I'm saving them. Thanks.

[Dead Corpse]

"Because a plurality of Republicans LIKE Rudy Giuliani and want to vote for him. Simple as that."

That's what we in Texas call a LIE.

Free Republic Opinion Poll: If the short list for Republican Nominee were narrowed down to the following, which one would you favor?

Composite Opinion
Newt Gingrich	28.0%		1,903
Duncan Hunter	22.1%		1,498
Rudy Giuliani	14.7%		997
Tom Tancredo	11.6%		791
Mitt Romney	8.1%		549
Undecided/pass	6.7%		455
Ron Paul	6.5%		440
John McCain	2.3%		159
	100.0%		6,792
Member Opinion
Duncan Hunter	26.8%		799
Newt Gingrich	25.7%		766
Rudy Giuliani	13.3%		396
Tom Tancredo	10.6%		316
Mitt Romney	8.3%		247
Undecided/pass	8.2%		244
Ron Paul	5.4%		162
John McCain	1.6%		48
	99.9%		2,978
Non-Member Opinion
Newt Gingrich	29.8%		1,137
Duncan Hunter	18.3%		699
Rudy Giuliani	15.8%		601
Tom Tancredo	12.5%		475
Mitt Romney	7.9%		302
Ron Paul	7.3%		278
Undecided/pass	5.5%		211
John McCain	2.9%		111
	100.0%

[flashbunny]

I say we draft Walter E. Williams for president.

That would drive the liberal republicans here nuts.

[Dead Corpse]

Hunter got caught kiting checks in the Congressional scandal a while back. That's about the worst they've been able to dig up on him.

Him and Newt are still my top two picks.

[Dead Corpse]

w00t! Walter would make an excellent POTUS.

[Talking_Mouse]

He will project the plank that endorses him.

What evidence do you have to back up this statement? It seems to me, and I would like to be persuaded otherwise, that Mr. Giuliani really does believe and support both very restrictive gun ownership as well as full abortion on demand, especially partial birth abortions. Both of these beliefs are anathema to most of us in the GOP. Why do you think he will support gun ownership and the rights of the unborn?

[NapkinUser]

"This simply reveals your lack of confidence in the existing tier of conservative GOP presidential candidates."

Existing now? Yes. Newt Gingrich is second or third place in almost every current worthless poll despite not having formed any committees or raised any money. If he gets in it, I believe him to be the only conservative primary candidate who can (and probably will) defeat the losers known as John McCain and Rudolph Giuliani.

[dirtboy]

So you're already looking at the Constitution Party rather than working to elect a conservative in the GOP. This simply reveals your lack of confidence in the existing tier of conservative GOP presidential candidates.

I can't imagine why anyone would think that. I mean, it's not like Rudy boosters have been running around FR saying no one else other than a liberal former mayor of NYC has a chance to win the GOP nomination - a year before anyone votes. /sarcasm

You can't have it both ways. But you'll still try.

[org.whodat]

Rudy governed New York City as a New Yorker.

Yes and the most of us would be happy for him to stay in new york. With the rest of the big spending liberals.

[rellimpank]

--which will guarantee a Demotraitor will win--

[Antoninus]

If Rudy gets the nomination, there will a pro-life, pro-2A third party candidate. You can't leave that kind of vacuum in a national election and not expect it to be filled. If Hillary has to make one up and finance their campaign, she will. She certainly has the money to do it.

You know that's what's going to happen if Rudy (God forbid!) gets the nomination.

It's so predictable that I can only theorize that the Rudy boosters are either hopelessly naive or closet Hillary supporters.

[California Patriot]

Sounds "totally inflexible" to me.

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT