Posted on 10/18/2007 9:03:32 PM PDT by calcowgirl
CBS Evening News, Feb 24, 1997
Rudy says there is a constitutional right to travel but we still put reasonable controls on the driving of an automobile.
He says it's irrational to put more controls on the driving of automobiles than on the possession of guns ("attack weapons").
Yet there are “so-called” conservatives who still support him!
We have freedom of speech, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have reasonable controls on broadcasting.
Giuliani is a liberal, period.
There are no controls on driving - only on driving on government owned roads. If I build a couple miles of road I can drive any speed I want on it.
If the government wants to set up some shooting ranges they can post the rules for my gun use at those ranges.
It’s irrational to have fewer controls on broadcasting than we do on contract language.
It depends on the meaning of reasonable “is”. I have a feeling that what the people that wrote the Constitution intended and what you intend are a long way apart.
Personally, I think the description of Rudy Giuliani as a Republican amounts to “an overstated argument.”
Grossly so...
I think it’s time to bring back one of my old taglines...
Washington Post - Nov 29, 1993 (citing Giuliani's appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press.")New York City Mayor-elect Rudolph W. Giuliani said he advocated a "uniform licensing system with real teeth in it," including background checks, lessons, tests and required renewals every two years to "show you're stable, you're healthy, you're able to handle a gun."
"Anything we can do . . . that will reduce the number of weapons in the country will help cities in particular and help police officers," said Giuliani, a former U.S. attorney. "Handguns should be in the hands of police officers."
Does Rudy say that because there is a Constitutional right to freedom of religion we should put reasonable controls on what God people can believe in and worship...?
Does Rudy say that because there is a Constitutional right to freedom of the press we should put reasonable controls on what the media can say, print or broadcast...?
Women have freedom to control their bodies, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have reasonable controls on abortion.
Use the liberals' own arguments against them.
Actually there isn't such a right, it is inferred from other principles. The right to bear arms is like the right of free speech, constitutionally guaranteed, but can have restrictions under the strictest scrutiny.
no Giuliani = NO PROBLEM
Giuliani as a candidate IS defeat.
Giuliani is a problem EASILY avoided by NOT voting for him in the primary.
Is there a constitutional amendment guaranteeing our right to travel freely?
Because they ARE specifically mentioned, in context, it places double emphasis on the fact that the feds were not delegated the power to infringe on that right.
At the same time, it acknowledges that the people have a right to keep and bear arms which means that even the state cannot involve itself with infringing on that right.
As I said, the emphasis is compounded in that neither the federal or state governments were delegated power to control the guns of We the people, in spite of any Thing in any state constitution to the contrary, for the Bill of Rights/Constituion trumps state law.
As one of the people, I agree with the above statement.
Thanks for the clarification, sir girliani.
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.