Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Second Amendment subject to REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS - Giuliani
Fox News ^ | March 12, 2007 | Brit Hume video

Posted on 03/12/2007 10:10:00 PM PDT by anonsquared

Everyone needs to see the video clip of Giuliani that Brit Hume aired today.

Go to http://www.foxnews.com/specialreport/ and scroll down to Race for 08 and click on the picture of Rudy to pull up the video player. Then you'll have to click on the video called Rallying for Rudy. It starts with Vitter endorsing him but keep watching for Rudy.

Asked if he would veto any bill impinging the 2nd amendment - he refused to say without first seeing the legislation.

Then the money quote...

"THERE'S A RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. THAT IS A PERSONAL RIGHT. THERE CAN BE REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS."

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; giuliani; gungrabber; hangontoyourammo; molonlabe; rino; rudy; rudy2008
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-179 next last
To: ellery
When the 1st amendment was written, I doubt the founding fathers had in mind the internet, which any citizen can use to broadcast dangerous opinions around the world. Clearly the 1st amendment should be limited to speech transmitted in-person, by town crier or on paper.

Then you are violating your own belief by posting here at FR.

81 posted on 03/13/2007 12:10:03 AM PDT by mountn man (The pleasure you get from life, is equal to the attitude you put into it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: mountn man
"What if"...

I understand where you're coming from, but while they might be tragic, every one of those "What ifs" is a lot less damaging than explosives have the potential to be. Junior shooting himself by accident with daddy's gun is terrible, but junior leveling half the block by accidentally starting a fire and touching off daddy's armory is worse.

Someone earlier in the thread pointed out that freedom ends where it crosses over the threshold of putting your fellow citizens at undue risk. By buying a gun, you assume the responsibility and risk of owning one. But by buying crew served weapons and explosives, you're asking your neighbors to assume those risks as well, and that's neither right nor fair.

82 posted on 03/13/2007 12:10:49 AM PDT by Zeroisanumber (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: mountn man
Is that Rummy in that picture?

I don't think so. Looks like a relative though doesn't he?

83 posted on 03/13/2007 12:12:26 AM PDT by Zeroisanumber (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: anonsquared
There are limits on every freedom, your freedoms extend only to the point at which they infringe on someone else's. Had the founders wanted absolute, unrestricted freedom to bear arms they would have said so in unambiguous terms. You should be more upset at the erosion of the 4th and 10th amendments.
84 posted on 03/13/2007 12:16:52 AM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZRepublican
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." [Ref: US Constitution, Article XIV]

The 14th Ammendment was passed, in part, because the Southern States were denying the Second Ammendment rights of the former slaves in their territories.

85 posted on 03/13/2007 12:18:22 AM PDT by sourcery (Government Warning: The Attorney General has determined that Federal Regulation is a health hazard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Hatband

Wrong! Clinton, Obama, and Edwards do not believe there is a right to keep and bear arms in the US Constitution. They do not believe the 2nd Amendment is a personal right.


86 posted on 03/13/2007 12:19:28 AM PDT by Cincinna (HILLARY & HER HINO "We are going to take things away from you for the Common Good")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
By buying a gun, you assume the responsibility and risk of owning one. But by buying crew served weapons and explosives, you're asking your neighbors to assume those risks as well, and that's neither right nor fair.

I have a liberal friend who refuses to come over because she feels I have guns (as she knows I'm pro 2nd, but have never told her if I have guns or how many). She feels my owning does infringe on her rights, because should someone break into my house, and steal my supposed guns, they then could go over to her house and kill her.

Likewise, if she had kids they wouldn't be allowed over, because if I had kids, they might find my supposed guns, and accidentally shoot her kids.

In her thinking, my, or anyones owning guns puts her at risk.

This is why I played devils advocate, too many liberal friends. I know how they...er...think!?!?!

87 posted on 03/13/2007 12:22:35 AM PDT by mountn man (The pleasure you get from life, is equal to the attitude you put into it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: truth_seeker
The issue is: what are reasonable restrictions?

For far too many people, the "DC Gun Ban" was "reasonable." For those who aren't aware of this draconian bit of law, the ownership or posession of a handgun was illegal in Washington, DC (by a civilian). And while longarms (certain rifles and shotguns) were allowed to be kept in your home, by law they had to be stored either disassembled or locked up. Either way, in a condition that made them useless for defense.

And unfortunately, many people think that the DC Gun Ban didn't go anywhere far enough.

Mark

88 posted on 03/13/2007 12:43:04 AM PDT by MarkL (When Kaylee says "No power in the `verse can stop me," it's cute. When River says it, it's scary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna

Rudy supports the 2nd amendment. Uh-huh. Riight. Tell you what, Cincinna, if you can nominate him without my vote, fine. If you can elect him without my vote, fine because Rooty and McInsane are the only two candidates that would make me seriously consider voting for Hillary. Why vote for Hillary Lite when you can have the real thing.


89 posted on 03/13/2007 12:43:29 AM PDT by Hatband
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: anonsquared
From what I am reading here, a lot of folks that are making excuses for Rudy also don't care for gun owners or the 2nd Amendment. Peas in a pod.
90 posted on 03/13/2007 12:50:17 AM PDT by Lockbar (March toward the sound of the guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lockbar

Precisely. The Rooty tooters are touting Rooty BECAUSE he is opposed to the 2nd amendment


91 posted on 03/13/2007 12:54:25 AM PDT by Hatband
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls



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.


92 posted on 03/13/2007 1:23:41 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: AZRepublican
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms

REPORT
of the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION
of the
UNITED STATES SENATE
NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS
Second Session
February 1982

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

Click here to read the report BY THE SENATE that finds an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT to keep and bear arms

"The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner."


±

"The Era of Osama lasted about an hour, from the time the first plane hit the tower to the moment the General Militia of Flight 93 reported for duty."
Toward FREEDOM

93 posted on 03/13/2007 1:38:46 AM PDT by Neil E. Wright (An oath is FOREVER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever

It doesn't matter what the NRA thinks. Reagan signed the law banning the manufacture and import of automatic weapons. He obviously thought that was a reasonable restriction and therefore he was no Second Amendment absolutist.


94 posted on 03/13/2007 2:15:14 AM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: AZRepublican

You're not really a Goldwater fan, are you?


95 posted on 03/13/2007 2:52:48 AM PDT by sheik yerbouty ( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna

It is a right that they don't stand on, but trample..


96 posted on 03/13/2007 2:55:00 AM PDT by sheik yerbouty ( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
That's a red herring. It's not a second amendment issue. In my opinion, the government may be able to restrict the usage and storage and transportation of those devices as an issue of public safety, but not the ownership of them. As far as the constitution is concerned, it's the written law, and you should be able to if you choose to.

Keep and Bear arms means just that. In fact, the argument has been made that you should ONLY be allowed to store weapons suitable for military use.

97 posted on 03/13/2007 3:19:41 AM PDT by tcostell (MOLON LABE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
Well then you should push for a law prohibiting the mounting of a recoilless rifle on a motor vehicle. But he should still be able to own it.
98 posted on 03/13/2007 3:21:47 AM PDT by tcostell (MOLON LABE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
Another Red Herring. Reagan was a conservative compared to almost all politicians of the 20th century. That does not mean that he didn't have issues where he was less conservative than others.
99 posted on 03/13/2007 3:24:49 AM PDT by tcostell (MOLON LABE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: anonsquared

no matter what giuliani says i will never vote for him


100 posted on 03/13/2007 3:33:45 AM PDT by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-179 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson