Posted on 09/21/2007 2:36:52 PM PDT by neverdem
Rudy Giuliani told the National Rifle Association Friday that his own views on gun control have evolved in part due to the Sept. 11 attacks, which he said highlighted the importance of the Second Amendment right of allowing law-abiding citizens to carry guns.
Facing a group that he once likened to "extremists," Giuliani sought to temper his past strong support for national gun control laws by saying he could no longer support a lawsuit he filed as New York mayor in 2000, which was designed to hold gun-makers liable for gun violence.
Giuliani said "there have been subsequent intervening events -- Sept. 11 -- which casts somewhat of a different light on the Second Amendment and Second Amendment rights. It doesn't change the fundamental rights, but maybe it highlights the necessity for them more."
Giuliani has built his presidential campaign on convincing Republicans that his performance after the Sept. 11 attacks shows he is the strong leader America needs -- but it was the first time he had linked his personal views on gun control to the terror attacks.
The lawsuit -- which ironically was being debated in a New York appeals court Friday as well -- was one of the sharpest points of disagreement between Giuliani and the gun–rights lobby, which he criticized as President Bill Clinton's leading Republican ally in pushing for a national assault weapons ban.
Giuliani rival John McCain also criticized the former mayor's tactics Friday, calling it a "particularly devious effort to use lawsuits to bankrupt our great manufacturers. A number of big-city mayors decided it was more important to blame the manufacturers of a legal product than it was to control crime in their own cities."
Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson also addressed the meeting of about 400 NRA members, winning by far the...
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
Rudy Giuliani has an abysmal record on gun rights.
I might believe his change of heart if it did not exactly coincide to when he decided to run for president.
"Maybe he/she will let you keep your B-B or paint gun."
Sorry, but I missed this posting. Your comments are really cleaver... but just brutal! You must have had some help with that one.
It would probably be good if you looked at priority #4 which cast a broad net on our freedoms.
Also, try to understand that "These requirements are based on the international challenges and the social issues that we will face in 2009. The ranking is based on both importance and how much the President can directly influence each of these."
BTW, your positions on your home page are a little weak.
This is only more poiniant with the posting of previous “wife calling during speeches” on youtube.com.
Apparently Guiliani has pulled this stunt multiple times before.
The MSM is holding his water as his numbers appear to be collapsing.
Multiple polls show the race tightening. Guiliani was content to ignore gun rights with no significant competition on his horrizon. Romney is pro-gun control along with McCain. This was an all RINO show.
Something has changed to scare the NYC crowd because they had NYC Rodham Clinton vs NYC Rodham Guilain as their wet dream race. Victory was irrelevant.
The cause of protecting the Second Amendment will only be advanced if we LET people see the light and join us. Nobody will support a cause that they’re not allowed to join.
Its ok...Don’t worry...
I know this guy who can surgically implant one if you want his number...
That way you won’t lose it anymore...;-)
Mine works fine...I have no ill effects...But some may argue there are some side effects...hehehe
I dunno, can we ever really nail down, and accurately label such a disingenuous waffle???
Or am I speaking oxymoronicallallally??? ;-)
>>Why won’t he tell someone that the sight of an aborted baby made him change his views. Far more of them murdered each year than died on 911.>>
Make that every five days. Anything in the name of female independence and feminism...
>>Why won’t he tell someone that the sight of an aborted baby made him change his views. Far more of them murdered each year than died on 911.>>
Make that every five days. Anything in the name of female independence and feminism...
September 21, 2007
WASHINGTON
Rudy Giuliani tried to convince pro life defenders Friday that he's a new man when it comes to defending the rights of the unborn -- due in part to 9/11 -- but many here doubted they'd back a candidate they remember as a big-city baby-killing crusader.
Several in the crowd at the Pro-Life Action News conference said they liked Giuliani's newly stated embrace of the right for babies to live and his belief the nation doesn't need new ways to slaughter children-- only stricter enforcement of current laws.
He also won points for saying he could no longer support a lawsuit he filed against what he said were religious kooks when he was New York mayor -- a dramatic shift from 2000, when he called it a vital tool in cracking down on unwanted pregnancies. He credited that switch in part to 9/11, saying the attacks cast a new light "on the idea of life and death."
Giuliani has made his performance after the 9/11 attacks a key part of his presidential campaign, but this was the first time he had linked his personal views on gun control to the terror attacks.
But afterward, some also questioned the depth of Giuliani's political conversion on abortion, or whether he was merely "pandering" -- in the words of some -- to a critical group in the Republican base.
"I didn't really understand the idea of life and death prior to 9/11." Giuliani said "But as President of 9/11 I learned a valuable lesson. When I saw people die, it made me think...these human beings will never breathe again, their hearts will never beat and they are gone forever."
VERY VERY TRUE but if you read his comments, they are just a repackaging of his NYC views.
The second amendment is not a local choice issue.
Excellent! A gated-community “tin-pot dictator”. I think this may be the most reliable way to do detect this behavior that I have read. Now if you could get them on a historic preservation committee at the same time.
That is a shameless, transparent lie. If the RKBA is a fundamental right, then it's irrelevant whether or not Giuliani considers firearms a "necessity." If Giuliani is now saying that he will permit people to have firearms because he now sees that it's a necessity, then he's saying that he doesn't believe it's a matter of fundamental rights.
He can't have it both ways. What a fraud.
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.