Posted on 03/23/2007 6:23:15 PM PDT by FairOpinion
But as a presidential candidate, Mr. Giuliani now talks very differently about guns as he tries to allay the concerns of Republican primary voters. He says he supports the right of individuals to bear arms, and that states — and generally not the federal government — should decide whether to put some limits on that right. He also spoke in favor of a federal appeals court ruling this month that struck down a District of Columbia ordinance barring people from keeping handguns in their homes.
Perhaps most striking, Mr. Giuliani’s campaign says it is not clear that he would support a measure he once championed, an assault weapons ban
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Plenty of restrictions on the USE of those guns can be placed by legislatures.
Why? Gun control measures are indeed constitutional at a state level.
Are speech control measures constitutional at a state level as well? Religion control measures?
Like what kind of restrictions fit into SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?
The worst part of his track record -- and the huge weight that he draped around his own neck -- was how he thought the nation should be governed while he was governing that big city!
A gun-grabbing mayor of a big city is bad enough . . . but a gun-grabbing mayor who incessantly called for a gun-grabbing Federal government has basically disqualified himself from any consideration for the White House.
Not true. Restrictions on guns are permissible, outright bans are not (hopefully soon to be clarified and reinforced by the USSC)
That's pretty weak.
Posted here this morning with 190 replies so far:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1805460/posts
I would imagine he takes his Winter coat off for the Summer, it's expedient and more comfortable. I doubt he throws out his Winter coat though.
Giuliani is starting to flop around worse than a flounder on dry land.
The only antidote to flip flopping is principle and character. Could someone please get some for Rudy, before he really embarrasses himself.
Are you trying to say that Rudy is going to abandon his core beliefs if he becomes president ?
I'm surprised he's pandering on this issue . I was at least giving him credit for his in OUR face approach to his Liberal views , now he's trying to back peddle .It just keeps getting worse with this guy .
He can take his NYC style gun control right on back to the big city where he thinks it's so fitting.
What kind of restrictions are you talking about?
Rudy should have said this earlier.
Meanwhile here comes Fred from the get-go, correcting his career mistakes.
Why do some states permit concealed carry and others do not?
Politicians have been known to do those sorts of things.
Concise, articulate, and to the point.
Mr. Giuliani’s aides say his basic view — allowing reasonable limits on gun ownership — has been consistent over the years.
Rudy did a great job of making NYC liveable which is one of the most important tasks for an executive. Part of that was reducing the flow of guns to criminal gangs. He will not try and govern the US as he did NYC because they are far different in problems and solutions.
Living in your socialist hell and my socialist hell, Illinois, should convince you that conservatives can never hope to win either of these states to a hard right conservative. But Rudy would be in play in both.
Right now our best hope is to try and hang on to as much power as we can while the Treason Media still holds sway. Rudy can not only win but could have coattails in many states which would put the Congress back into contention.
He is no gun-grabber even if not perfect by your standards and will pursue many other policies important to you. Our view should be farther down the road after 08. Rudy with a conservative VP could be the means of starting another wave of conservative success.
I won't believe him on this issue until I see pictures of him hunting deer while crawling on his stomach holding a shotgun.
;^)
Huh??? Is he confused? Does he honestly think that this is a "conservative" 2A position??? *Groan*
If this is a fair glimpse at his understanding of the Constitution, these supposed "originalist" judges we keep hearing about are going to be a hoot.
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.