Posted on 02/07/2007 2:40:44 PM PST by Jim Robinson
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...
HANNITY: You inherited those laws, the gun laws in New York?
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.
HANNITY: How do you feel about the Brady bill and assault ban?
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.
Maybe. Just make sure you keep it locked & loaded.
Wow!! Then why did you appear to be so pro-Rudy? I thought you were after Eternal Vigilance who (I could be mistaken??) is also pro-conservative Duncan Hunter. Ok, time to go back and re-read!
Heck, he was polling BEHIND HILLARY in the 2000 NYC Senate race when he withdrew.
Yet his supporters tell us he's the one to beat the Hildabeast?
I'd be better off betting on the Washington Generals against the spread.
Would you trust any of them with your life?
I don't know that he's a liar. I think he's rather brazenly signaling that he's going to stuff a social liberal, anti-Second Amendment agenda down our throats.
I have the same problem.
And why is that? Because they don't agree with you?
Some friendly advice: you might want to get your emotions under wraps. You both seem a bit brittle.
LOL regarding the pictures.
I do have a question. As someone who has been on a lot of Rudy thread, I didn't get your comment about Rudy's connections to the Middle East. What am I missing?
If it's a non-violent felony, we shouldn't.
Cheating on your income taxes is a felony. Should someone lose their freedom to maintain the means to protect themselves against someone bigger and meaner because they falsified an income-tax return?
And I meant to say, I like our field too.
It's sad to see Sean jeopardize his credibility by aligning with a pro-abortion, open borders, gay loving gun grabber in his Stop Hillary campaign.
Well, I think he can be both. He can be brazen, and then he can claim he will appoint strict constructionists when he appointed upwards of two pubbies out of sixty judicial appointments as mayor of NYC.
Don't underestimate Rudy. He can multitask against the interests of the base.
Makes you wonder just how sincere Sean's reporting along the border was.
The dreaded 666 post. :-)
Because less than twenty years ago I was the target of a terrorist group...I know the sense of helplessness that people feel. I know the urge to arm yourself because that's what I did. I was trained in firearms...I carried a concealed weapon. I made the determination that if somebody was going to try to take me out, I was going to take them with me."
Senator Dianne Feinstein
I guess Senators have the right to bear arms to protect themselves.
And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms
Are you trying to be stupid on purpose? The interpretation of the Supreme Court is that the 14th Amendment "incorporates" the restrictions of the federal government onto the individual state governments depending on case law. That's a different argument than arguing how those restrictions applied prior to the 14th's passage. It is also different depending on which amendments have received the "incorporation" blessing from the Supreme Court.
The passage you cited about "the supreme Law of the Land" has no bearing on whether or not an amendment is "incorporated" by the USSC.
Hillary would galvanize Republicans, Rudy would give us more of '92 & '06.
Rudy can outwordsmith Bill Clinton, too. As I've studied Rudy's various statements I have seen escape holes in the text large enough to drag an 18-wheeler through.
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.