Posted on 02/11/2007 1:33:49 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Giuliani: Gun control helped lower crime
5 minutes ago
Rudy Giuliani addressed a potentially troublesome issue with conservative voters, saying his policies as mayor to get handguns off the street helped reduce crime in New York.
"I used gun control as mayor," he said at a news conference Saturday during a swing through California. But "I understand the Second Amendment. I understand the right to bear arms."
He said what he did as mayor would have no effect on hunting.
Addressing another potential trouble spot with conservatives, Giuliani spoke in favor of a border fence, saying, "You have to have secure borders, you have to have a fence, and the fence I think has to be a highly technological one."
The nation needs to know, he said, who is coming into the country and why. But he provided scant details on how he would deal with illegal immigrants already in the country. Citizens, he added, should be able to read and write English.
Giuliani was to make an address Monday in Silicon Valley and he was to appear Tuesday at an agricultural fair in the Central Valley.
Asked when he would make a formal announcement that he is a candidate for the Republican nomination, Giuliani said: "Well, formally announce? I don't know."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
And it will launch a third party, which hopefully will scare the stuffing out of the GOP reeling from a second thunderous rout in '08.
Trouble is, a third party will just push the GOP further left. Already, many in the party leadership are blaming the social conservatives for 06, and to be honest if you are a fiscal conservative the GOP abandoned you also.
Rather than running on issues and ideas, the GOP has decided to run on fear and star power. That won't work.
Trouble is, a third party will just push the GOP further left.
Exactly, you'll have two parties splitting the center left voters and a real opportunity for a successful third party.
If any of these three RINO clowns get the nomination, I'm staying the hell home on election day.
I'm done with having to hold my nose when I vote.
Then I would hope that a third party challenge of constitutionalists would eventually replace the GOP if it stayed stuck on stupid. If we want socialism, the GOP is just a weak version of the DNC. America needs an option that is genuinely non-socialistic, pro-freedom and pro-individualism. Else, head to the hills.
No matter what your stance is on the 2nd Amendment, it most emphatically is not about hunting. If Rudy hopes to see the interior of the W.H. he better start making the Social Right of this country feel a little bit better about voting for him or were going to see Hillary as the next POTUS. The dumb-ass statement below is not going to cut it south of the Mason Dixon Line. This NYC rhetoric will cost him dearly if it has not already.
Why am I forwarding this to the business crowd? Because, if we fail to put a fiscal conservative into the White House we will be setting the table for socialized medicine, higher taxes and a whole host of new government regulations.
Hillary does not want just want to take the profits of "Big Oil"; she wants all the profits from all of the businesses! SHE IS A SOCIALIST THROUGH AND THROUGH! She and her ilk will erase or confiscate untold billions from the people who risked and worked hard to create a life for themselves and their families.
If Rudy cannot get his collective act together I would suggest the business community pressure the GOP to get on the stick and start promoting an elect able candidate that shares the same values as the base. Failure to energize the base (Social Conservatives) of the GOP will doom us.
True but I prefer them be upfront about it rather than urinate down my leg and tell me it's drizzling.
Me, too.
If Rudy hopes to see the interior of the W.H. he better start making the Social Right of this country feel a little bit better about voting for him or were going to see Hillary as the next POTUS.
Don't encourage him. We don't need to feel better about a left wing fascist.
"If any of these three RINO clowns get the nomination, I'm staying the hell home on election day.
I'm done with having to hold my nose when I vote."
I understand your frustration, but still go out and vote for the Libertarian or Conservative party for Pres and cast a vote for your local reps/senators state & federal.
At worst, just leave the presidential vote blank.
implicit in your question, is the assumption that the 2A offers blanket constitutional protection all the way to concealed carry. and that protection extends to the states being forbidden from regulation also. why won't the NRA litigate that?
the 2A doesn't prevent "all crimes" either.
you can get a gun legally in NYC.
You were asked if you thought Constitutional rights end at some city limits. Your smart ass answer indicates that you don't give a damn about the matter.
"all these threads regarding Rudy and guns, you have to look at them in the context of what he was trying to do as mayor of NYC."
He took away the right of the citizens to effective self defense. That's something even Dinkins didn't do. He took guns away from some FReepers, and other NYers. They were not criminals. They were law abiding folks.
most everyone seems to be content with the status quo on this issue. the NRA doesn't want the blanket constitutionality of the 2A (as it applies to the states) to be taken into federal court, as they fear the outcome. sweeping federal gun restrictions are a bad idea, even the Dems won't touch it. states and their elected bodies can decide for themselves where the line should be drawn in their own states, especially regarding CCW. any state "all guns are illegal" laws would be the ones worthy of challenging in the federal courts.
I think what I have described above, is going to be the status quo in the US for a very long time.
I will never vote for Rino Rudy.
Sure, if you're a celebrity, a politician, a politician's favorite mistress...that can happen. Not impossible at all.
well, unless you believe the NRA is "anti-gun" - there is a reason why they don't want to take the issue of blanket 2A gun rights, as applied to the states, into federal court. why is that?
sure, its a great idea to give "law abiding" folks the right to carry a gun. how do you decide who the "law abiding" folks are? you can't. in an urban environment, if I could get a CCW permit in NYC, so could some 18 year old inner city youth gangbanger or MS13 member with no criminal record or reason to otherwise be excluded. now sure, that same person intent on misdeeds could get that gun illegally (and they do). But the difference is, if I give it to him legally - I remove the ability of law enforcement to proactively fight gun crime. A cop can't do anything to him for weapons possession, they have to wait until AFTER he commits a crime with that gun. that's not what people, in an urban environment, expect as a result of policing efforts. they want crime thwarted BEFORE it happens, otherwise we turn the police into "cleanup crews" who simply come in and investigate gun crimes after they occur, unless they happen to be exactly in the right place at the right time to stop the crime.
If there were a real fire and you knew it and kept it secret from everyone, you could probably be convicted of several serious crimes.
Now, on the Second Amendment, it says you can "keep and bear arms". When "bearing arms" was a privilege reserved to the nobility alone, it simply meant "self-protection" and right to serve in a military capacity during war, or to serve in a guard for the town. The business about "keeping arms" is much more serious ~ even titled nobles could keep only the arms specified by, or allowed, by their liege lords.
Again, reviewing the existing language in light of what it meant for titled nobles with privileges, the Second Amendment means you can keep whatever arms you wish, as long as you wish, and where you wish, and for the purpose of defending yourself, your family, your community, or, maybe even your nation.
This was something not subject to review by a higher authority.
In fact, the Second Amendment clearly gives each and every American a RIGHT that the federal government doesn't even have!
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.