Rudy on gun control: "You've got to REGULATE consistent with the Second Amendment"

HANNITY: Let me move on. And the issue of guns has come up a lot. When people talk about Mayor Giuliani, New York City had some of the toughest gun laws in the entire country. Do you support the right of people to carry handguns?

GIULIANI: I understand the Second Amendment. I support it. People have the right to bear arms. When I was mayor of New York, I took over at a very, very difficult time. We were averaging about 2,000 murders a year, 10,000...

GIULIANI: Yes, and I used them. I used them to help bring down homicide. We reduced homicide, I think, by 65-70 percent. And some of it was by taking guns out of the streets of New York City.

So if you're talking about a city like New York, a densely populated area like New York, I think it's appropriate. You might have different laws other places, and maybe a lot of this gets resolved based on different states, different communities making decisions. After all, we do have a federal system of government in which you have the ability to accomplish that.

HANNITY: So you would support the state's rights to choose on specific gun laws?

GIULIANI: Yes, I mean, a place like New York that is densely populated, or maybe a place that is experiencing a serious crime problem, like a few cities are now, kind of coming back, thank goodness not New York, but some other cities, maybe you have one solution there and in another place, more rural, more suburban, other issues, you have a different set of rules.

HANNITY: But generally speaking, do you think it's acceptable if citizens have the right to carry a handgun?

GIULIANI: It's not only -- I mean, it's part of the Constitution. People have the right to bear arms. Then the restrictions of it have to be reasonable and sensible. You can't just remove that right. You've got to regulate, consistent with the Second Amendment.

GIULIANI: I was in favor of that as part of the crime bill. I was in favor of it because I thought that it was necessary both to get the crime bill passed and also necessary with the 2,000 murders or so that we were looking at, 1,800, 1,900, to 2,000 murders, that I could use that in a tactical way to reduce crime. And I did.

For starters:

NRA Mourns Loss of Former President Ronald Reagan

"We will never disarm any American who seeks to protect his or her family from fear and harm." -- President Ronald Reagan

American Rifleman cover, July 1983.
White House photo by Jack Kightlinger.

The heartfelt convictions behind those words demonstrate why, in 1980, for the first time in its history, NRA formally endorsed a candidate for President of the United States. The October, 1980 issue of American Rifleman left no doubt as to where NRA stood on Ronald Reagan: "Very clearly, Governor Reagan -- a long-time member of NRA -- shares our fervent belief in the absolute meaning of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms applies to the individual citizen and that it is a right inviolate, which cannot be abridged."

As NRA members mourn the loss of this great champion of freedom, we look back with respect at the forceful speech President Reagan delivered at the NRA Annual Meetings in Phoenix, Ariz., as reported in the July, 1983 issue of American Rifleman:

PRESIDENT Ronald Reagan stood proudly beneath the official seal of the National Rifle Association in Phoenix, May 6, and in a 37-minute address left no doubt where he and his administration stood on virtually every issue of importance to the NRA - from gun control and federal firearms law reform to hunter ethics, wildlife management and the sale of M1 rifles.
"I've always felt a special bond with members of your group," President Reagan told the NRA Legislative Session. "You live by Lincoln's words, 'Important principles may and must be inflexible.' Your philosophy puts its trust in people. So you insist individuals be held accountable for their actions. The NRA believes America's laws were made to be obeyed and that our constitutional liberties are just as important today as 200 years ago. And by the way, the Constitution does not say Government shall decree the right to keep and bear arms. The Constitution says 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'"

Mr. Reagan's speech marked the first time a President in office had addressed the NRA membership. Nearly 4,000 packed the Phoenix Civic Center for the event, while another 1,000 watched on special closed-circuit televisions.

"Good organizations don't just happen," President Reagan told the NRA. "They take root in a body of shared beliefs. They flow from strong leadership with vision, initiative and determination to reach great goals. And what you've accomplished speaks for itself ..."

As proof of the NRA's legislative success, President Reagan pointed to the overwhelming defeat of Proposition 15 in California.

"You shocked California last November when you mobilized to help send Proposition 15 down to defeat. You pointed out that police would be so busy arresting handgun owners, they would be unable to protect the people against criminals. It's a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun control laws. I happen to know this from personal experience."

Looking fit and at home in front of an audience which had hung banners proclaiming him "America's Number One Sportsman," President Reagan told the national news media that, "No group does more to promote gun safety and respect for the laws of this land than the NRA, and I thank you. Still, we've both heard the charges that supporting gun owners' rights encourages a violent, shoot-em-up society. Don't they understand that most violent crimes are not committed by decent, lawabiding citizens, they're committed by career criminals? Hard-core criminals use guns, and locking them up and throwing away the key is the best gun control law we could ever have."

President Reagan, endorsed by the NRA in 1980, reiterated his administration's support for tough, mandatory jail sentences for persons who misuse weapons in crimes of violence.

"I've said many times before that our administration did not come to Washington to continue business as usual. Either we make fundamental reforms that change things for the better, or we aren't doing our job. We think it's time for our loved ones to walk the streets of America without being afraid."

President Reagan used the forum to discuss national and international issues ranging from peacekeeping initiatives in Lebanon to the need for a revitalized U.S. military force. But nowhere were his points more telling than when he said headway was being made in a crackdown on crime in America.

"We have declared war on organized crime and the career criminal in America. More than 100 prosecutors' offices are working with special teams around the country to throw the book at career criminals in court. And we are determined to cripple the drug pushers who are poisoning the minds and bodies of our children. We want mandatory sentences, we want firm and speedy application of penalties, and we want to abolish parole for federal offenses. But there is one thing we do not want: we will never disarm any American who seeks to protect his or her family from fear and harm.

"Longer prison sentences and tougher treatment are beginning to pay dividends," he said. "And make no mistake: this is happening because you, the people, are fed up with crime. You're the ones who are organizing your local police, insisting that justice be carried out - and every time you do that you keep the spirit of democracy strong in America."

Noting that National Police Week followed the NRA Annual Meetings and recognizing the NRA's commitment to law enforcement, Mr. Reagan said, "Men and women in blue across America (should know) that we stand with you, this week and every week of the year." He urged support for the administration's call for a minimum mandatory jail term for the use of armor-piercing ammunition during a federal crime of violence.

"As we crack down on criminals," the President told the crowd, "we are trying to move forward on another front: to reform the firearms laws which needlessly interfere with the rights of legitimate gun owners like yourselves. We are working closely with your leadership and congressional supporters such as Senator McClure and Congressman Volkmer. I look forward to signing a bill that truly protects the rights of law-abiding citizens, without diminishing the effectiveness of criminal law enforcement against the misuse of firearms.

"Your leadership's support has been important to us," President Reagan, a long-time NRA Life Member who was honored for his support at the Legislative Session by NRA Executive Vice President Harlon Carter. "Just last year I signed two amendments into law: one eliminated recordkeeping requirements for .22 cal. ammunition and the other saved many custom gunsmiths from ruin."

Mr. Reagan also said he emphatically favors the Civilian Marksmanship Program because of its effectiveness in training American citizens in marksmanship, that the sale of M1 rifles through the DCM program had been expanded during his administration, and that he had instructed the Department of Defense to explore ways sales might be increased even further.

There was a Presidential commitment to another group of gun owners as well - America's hunters, whom Mr. Reagan praised as being the country's "foremost conservationists. Our administration believes in the concept of stewardship, caring for the resources we have for the benefit of mankind. We favor economic development - but not within our national parks or our wilderness areas. We have not and never will propose that. What we do say is: when the last administration arbitrarily closed tens of millions of acres of Alaskan lands, telling sport hunters to stay out, then, yes, we think that was wrong and we're trying to correct it." The President was referring to a bill by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), which would reopen 12 million acres of Alaska lands to sport hunting and sport hunting only.

In his speech, President Reagan said the budget for restoration and improvement of the National Park Service and wildlife resources, cut drastically during President Jimmy Carter's term in office, has been doubled. And with the NRA, he noted, the administration actively is working to correct the past destruction of America's wetlands.

"The backbone of our conservation efforts begins with American sportsmen," the President said. "For more than 40 years, hunters have been paying a special excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition through the Pittman-Robertson Act - nearly $1.2 billion since 1939. State wildlife managers have used these funds to preserve and enhance valuable wildlife habitats. Such wild creatures as the whitetail deer, ruffed grouse, wild turkey and pronghorn antelope, which were threatened with extinction in many areas, have been brought back, in some cases to great abundance.

"The money (from Pittman-Robertson) will fund important studies of game and their habitat; it will provide food and habitat projects for wildlife and portions will go for hunter safety courses - where our youngsters will be taught marksmanship, firearms safety, and some of the values and ethics of hunting and the outdoors. I greatly appreciate your contributions to preserving our national treasures for the benefit of our people and future generations.

"The United States remains the last, best hope for a mankind plagued by tyranny and deprivation," the President told the NRA Legislative Session. "America is no stronger than its people, and that means you and me. I believe in you. And I believe that if we work together, then one day we will say: we have fought the good fight; we have finished the race; we have kept the faith; and to our children, and our children's children, we can say: we did all that could be done in the moment that was given to us here on Earth."

On May 9, 1983, NRA named President Reagan an Honorary Life Member, a title bestowed to just 19 individuals in the 133-year history of NRA. The resolution to confer the title on the President, as it appeared in the August 1983 issue of American Rifleman, is reprinted below:

WHEREAS, Ronald Reagan has restored confidence in government and has again raised the office of President to its rightful stature by his character, personal integrity, leadership and devotion to fundamental principles of constitutional government; and
WHEREAS, throughout his entire public life, President Reagan has been steadfast in his defense of individual rights and freedoms as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights; and

WHEREAS, despite great personal adversity, President Reagan has forcefully stood by his convictions in support of the second amendment right of citizens to keep and bear arms for any legitimate purpose, including self-defense; and

WHEREAS, he vigorously rejects the myth that gun control is crime control but instead firmly believes in the reality that the most effective form of crime control is swift and certain punishment for criminals; and WHEREAS, President Reagan, as a hunter, rancher and outdoorsman, is a conservationist in the truest sense; and

WHEREAS, the National Rifle Association of America is proud and greatly honored to have President Reagan as a Life Member; and

WHEREAS, the membership of the National Rifle Association of America has been singularly privileged to have Ronald Reagan as the first sitting President of the United States to address them at an annual meeting and to have him there reaffirm his commitment to those rights and principles which he and we share; and

WHEREAS, Ronald Reagan so exemplified the values, beliefs, and views of the membership of the National Rifle Association of America that in 1980 he became the only candidate in its history to be endorsed by the Association for the office of President of the United States; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, that President Reagan be highly commended for his steadfast defense of the right to keep and bear arms, as well as the other fundamental principles upon which this great nation was founded; and, be it further

RESOLVED, that President Reagan be congratulated for his contributions toward restoring the greatness and dignity of the presidency and confidence in our federal government here and abroad; and, be it further

RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association of America on May 9, 1983, by this resolution convey to President Reagan this Association's highest recognition for exemplary service to our nation and our association - Honorary Life Membership, and, be it further

RESOLVED, that Ronald Reagan heed the call of his 2.6 million NRA member fellow citizens to continue his vital service to this nation and the free world by serving a second term as President of the United States of America.

http://www.nra.org/Article.aspx?id=224

Why Did it Have to be ... Guns?
by L. Neil Smith
lneil@lneilsmith.org

Over the past 30 years, I've been paid to write almost two million words, every one of which, sooner or later, came back to the issue of guns and gun-ownership. Naturally, I've thought about the issue a lot, and it has always determined the way I vote.

People accuse me of being a single-issue writer, a single- issue thinker, and a single- issue voter, but it isn't true. What I've chosen, in a world where there's never enough time and energy, is to focus on the one political issue which most clearly and unmistakably demonstrates what any politician—or political philosophy—is made of, right down to the creamy liquid center.

Make no mistake: all politicians—even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership—hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician—or political philosophy—can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash—for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything—without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude—toward your ownership and use of weapons—conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

If he doesn't want you to have the means of defending your life, do you want him in a position to control it?

If he makes excuses about obeying a law he's sworn to uphold and defend—the highest law of the land, the Bill of Rights—do you want to entrust him with anything?

If he ignores you, sneers at you, complains about you, or defames you, if he calls you names only he thinks are evil—like "Constitutionalist"—when you insist that he account for himself, hasn't he betrayed his oath, isn't he unfit to hold office, and doesn't he really belong in jail?

Sure, these are all leading questions. They're the questions that led me to the issue of guns and gun ownership as the clearest and most unmistakable demonstration of what any given politician—or political philosophy—is really made of.

He may lecture you about the dangerous weirdos out there who shouldn't have a gun—but what does that have to do with you? Why in the name of John Moses Browning should you be made to suffer for the misdeeds of others? Didn't you lay aside the infantile notion of group punishment when you left public school—or the military? Isn't it an essentially European notion, anyway—Prussian, maybe—and certainly not what America was supposed to be all about?

And if there are dangerous weirdos out there, does it make sense to deprive you of the means of protecting yourself from them? Forget about those other people, those dangerous weirdos, this is about you, and it has been, all along.

Try it yourself: if a politician won't trust you, why should you trust him? If he's a man—and you're not—what does his lack of trust tell you about his real attitude toward women? If "he" happens to be a woman, what makes her so perverse that she's eager to render her fellow women helpless on the mean and seedy streets her policies helped create? Should you believe her when she says she wants to help you by imposing some infantile group health care program on you at the point of the kind of gun she doesn't want you to have?

On the other hand—or the other party—should you believe anything politicians say who claim they stand for freedom, but drag their feet and make excuses about repealing limits on your right to own and carry weapons? What does this tell you about their real motives for ignoring voters and ramming through one infantile group trade agreement after another with other countries?

Makes voting simpler, doesn't it? You don't have to study every issue—health care, international trade—all you have to do is use this X-ray machine, this Vulcan mind-meld, to get beyond their empty words and find out how politicians really feel. About you. And that, of course, is why they hate it.

And that's why I'm accused of being a single-issue writer, thinker, and voter.

But it isn't true, is it?

Permission to redistribute this article is herewith granted by the author—provided that it is reproduced unedited, in its entirety, and appropriate credit given.

well it's nice to know you go against every other pro-2nd amendment law scholar too.

Way to cite your sources there, buddy!

If you can find me, oh, let's say three scholars, published in reputable journals, who assert that a holding of Miller is that all weapons that have reasonable efficacy to the militia are protected by the Second Amendment, I will PayPal you $50. No fooling.

First, for just about every instance, the SKS isn't full auto.

I thank you for correcting the trivial error which does not affect my argument in the slightest. Please feel free to substitute a weapon that does in fact fall under the purview of the NFA '34.

But nonetheless, any joe schmoe with a C&R card can call up a gun store across the country and have as many C&R SKS rifles as they want shipped to them via ups.

Show of hands: how many of you knew what he meant by "C&R card"? For those who are curious, C&R means "curios and relics" and refers to some very, very old firearms. There is one and only one SKS model on the list, and it's an old Soviet model.

No forms to sign, no need to show up at the store. No waiting periods except as long as it takes UPS to get it to you.

I'm sorry, that is incorrect. According to the ATF (pay special attention to the boldfaced section):

SECTION II. Firearms Classified as Curios or Relics Under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44: Licensed collectors may acquire, hold or dispose of these firearms as curios or relics. However, they are still "firearms" as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3) and are, therefore, subject to all Chapter 44 controls.

That means that fully-automatic weapons, silencers, explosives, and short-barreled shotguns and rifles must still comply with the NFA, they still must pay the transfer tax, there still must be the appropriate forms filed, and the Feds will still take an intense interest if you try to load up an arsenal of fully-automatic firearms.

You being so knowledgeable probably knew that, didn't you?

Apparently I knew more about it than you did.

So johnny jihad can get his girlfriend or another person with C&R card to order as many SKS (bad example on your part, really, try harder next time) and have them delivered direct to their door.

I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time keeping a straight face, I can't help but picture a bunch of jihadis shouting "ALLAHU AKBAR!" as they charge with a bunch of curios and relics... bolt-action rifles, Civil War-era muskets, and 17th century blunderbusses. Curios and relics, indeed.

Now onto your other ridiculous points: Making an AK isn't that hard.

Growing tomatoes isn't that hard. But most people who want tomatoes buy them, because buying is easier. The jihadis would find it much easier to get weapons if they could buy them legally in an open market than if they had to manufacture them. Why do you want to make a terrorist's job easier?

For pete's sake, they make AK's in the third world in mud shacks.

But they don't import them here... not legally, anyway. They would, if you had your way.

So that deflates you're other argument that it's too hard.

That wasn't my argument, my argument is that it's harder. Do you disagree?

And he's not going to buy the guns and risk raising eyebrows when he can homebrew them for much cheaper and stay further under the radar.

You really think that if there were no restrictions on the manufacture, import, and sale of automatic weapons, it'd be cheaper to make your own? Tell me, do you own any guns? Did you buy them, or make them? Were they made in a professional factory, or homebrewed on a CNC machine? Why did you buy them, and risk "raising eyebrows?" Why should Johnny care about "raising eyebrows" if it's perfectly legal for he and his friends to buy their arsenal and then rigorously train with them in the desert?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.