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 ...
not true at all, plenty of NYC business owners have gun carry permits. I know several personally, restaurant/bar owners, jewelry dealers, etc.
So why make it tough for an "ordinary" citizen of the US to carry a gun in NYC? Why should anyone be denied a fundamental BOR for any reason. Please account?
So Rudy knowingly ignored 2A. Bad Rudy.
Good Rudy.
Speak up. Do rights apply only to the propertied interests that you cited, or to all? How can you account to the bereaved families of the unpropertied citizens, that the right to carry was denied for x or y reasons?
Not a direct quote from Rudy. If he did say something similar to that, then of course he would have a poor understanding of 2A.
because in NYC, the "ordinary" people include alot of bad dudes. there is no basis to exclude them from also getting gun carry permits.
what I would like to hear from the 2A folks on this thread - what do you think the gun laws (state) ought to be? should there be any? any background checks? exclusions for prior criminal records, mental illness, anything? fully anonymous purchases of guns, no different then buying a can of soda? I mean, if its really a constitutional right, then it should be administered as I described.
imagine that policy above in a place like NYC. every inner city 18 year old can buy a gun as easy as buying a soda, and can carry it legally with no issue about being questioned by the police. the only check on such a policy, would be to tell the honest citizens - "hey, we can't police this - you're Wyatt Earp now - good luck".
Are there not also "ordinary" people who are victims in NYC? I'll wait for your reply on that before continuing with the obvious.
I'll look into Hunter. I don't know alot about him but if he's 2A and anti-Rudy, he may be the way.
Sorry, I think I misunderstood your original post. I didn't realize that you were only referring to things such as concealed carry and restricting arms on public transit.
I like Hunter.
If he's the Rudy-RINO-antidote, I'll get there.
Combat vet whose son is a serving Marine who also went to Iraq may have a few good ideas on how to fight the war.
There was a time when I said I might suck it up and vote Rudy for the WOT alone if it came to that.
Now? I'm not going to do it. And the party troopers can wail like a Liberal that has had the truth told about them for all I care.
Watching Rudy "triangulating" is more then I can stomach of politicians these days. All I've heard is how we may disagree but at least you know where Rudy stands. G.W.B. gave the same speech. In his case he mostly lived up to it, except for the uwelcome surprise of attacks on his core supporters after he won re-election...
Rudy's already trying to have it both ways and showing himself to be disingenuous in the process. You are for gun control or you are not. you are for border security, or you are not. You are for abortion, or you are not. If Rudy really means what he says n believes then damn well be honest about it rather then trying to play the core GOP constituencies for fools.
The only way to challenge it, is by a fed appeal, after a city, or state criminal conviction. The NRA is not an individual. Want to volunteer?
"sure, its a great idea to give "law abiding" folks the right to carry a gun. how do"
No one gives that right. The right is inherent and is connected with the right to life and the gift of freedom. The right was specifically acknowledged by the founders as being one of those inalienable rights. It is what allows an effective self defense against criminal act, from muggings, to tyranny.
"how do you decide who the "law abiding" folks are?"
LOL! Give me a break. Does felony conviction sound familiar?
"I could get a CCW permit in NYC,
No you can not! Giuliani took that away.
" so could some 18 year old inner city youth gangbanger or MS13 member with no criminal record or reason to otherwise be excluded"
No they can not. One must be 21 anywhere in the country to purchase a handgun. Also, gangs are criminal enterprises, so they are forbidden from possessing firearms. See RICO, and the drugs laws, scan the State laws regarding firearms, and 18USC9xx.
"A cop can't do anything to him for weapons possession, they have to wait until AFTER he commits a crime with that gun."
Same thing the grabbers say about me.
"that's not what people, in an urban environment, expect as a result of policing efforts."
I lived in an urban environment. I know what people think. A great number of them want to be able to defend themselves. They can't, because they're not allowed to. The bliss ninnies are offended when the poor perp bleeds. The cops don't like it, because it cuts in on their inflated egos, and jobs program. Most folks in places like NY, Chicago, LA, simple leave to avoid confrontation with the grabbers. There's absolutely nothing different between urban, suburban, and rural, that justifies grabbing anywhere.
"they want crime thwarted BEFORE it happens,"
That's only possible if folks can defend themselves. That fact doesn't seem to stick in folks minds very well. The grabbers prefer, "we turn the police into "cleanup crews" who simply come in and investigate gun crimes after they occur." don't tell me it's not either, because that's what happens! Now tell me a woman w/o a gun has a chance at fending off a rapist. Tell me most folks can fend off hoods armed with fists, knives, or pipes.
yes, "felony conviction" - so as I said, the crime has to occur FIRST.
fine - you have to be 21 - plenty of 21 year old gang members. and the gang may be criminal enterprise, but how are you going to apply "association" (absent a conviction for something) as an exclusion for a constitutional right? you can't, how do I know who is a member?
you are right, many urban police forces don't work well. and in those situations I agree with you, the choice between an ineffective police force, and broad gun carrying is an easy one - I'll take the gun. But it doesn't always have to be that way, Rudy didn't reduce murders in NYC from 2200+ to 700, by arming 5 million people.
"I used gun control as mayor"
Makes a man wonder.......where have all the conservatives gone?
Good grief - where ARE all the conservatives?
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.