Posted on 03/03/2007 3:16:02 PM PST by Mr. Brightside
You're plenty smart to be wary of his type, swamp. His arguments have statism written all over them. More power for government, not less. He's clearly defending the current level of "reasonable" gun control that is the status quo in Washington, and brought to us by the Democratic party and RINO politicians in the name of securing our safety.
It's interesting that we're having to argue with people about this topic at all.
Heck, it sure sounds a lot easier than all that voting and stuff like judges, courts, laws, etc. Think of the money we could save. Oh but then which "militia" would be the right one? It works well in Baghdad. When they are unhappy with something, they just go out and take care of business. Saves on police, etc.
As I see it, the Constitution was meant, in part, as a guide so that people could know when to fight against rogue militias who opposed legitimate government action, and when to join with militias who legitimately opposed rogue government action.
A guide?????????? I've heard it called many things, but never a guide. Here all this time I thought it was the supreme law of the land. That would be quite a bit different from a guide, don't you think?
"They" can take Rudy, and shove him! I started out with an open mind, ready to negotiate and bargain, never ready to have any pretender shoved up my ass!
"They" may think they have a genetic lock on all the smarts, but, Oh well!
Tell me straight, are you personally convinced that Rudy is so much damned smarter than you are, that Rudy is the last damned hope to save the Nation?
Rudy may be "electable" but he is still an anti
American pissant liberal!
1
You are absolutely correct. He has shown that he has every intent of using executive power to limit access to all handguns and assault weapons. He has also made statements which indicate he believes the Second Amendment protects only the right to own firearms for hunting.
Heck, I can't even keep up with my beer. Now where did I put it......?
Here's what I read from the interview you posted above:
Well Talk is cheap right now with all the candidates. And if we still have a Democrat controlled Senate and Congress (which I have a feeling we will) we will get nothing done about the border.
Remember a few choice words from some of our more fiery politicians during founding of our nation:
I don't want to be fed by Giuliani, and I hope most Americans choose not to let the kinds of chains he favors rest lightly upon them. We needn't purchase a small measure of safety from his anti-gun stance, either.
Do you believe that Rudy's gun control positions "conform to the second amendment"? Does a strict assault weapon ban "conform to the second amendment"? Sane, law abiding citizens denied the right to own handguns "conforms to the second amendment"? This type of gun control has plenty to do with a person's normal rights to own a weapon and use it.
Please, explain how disarming sane, law-abiding citizens is a rational method for "dealing with a city rampant with killings".
I like Rudy, and he's better than most blue state politicians on most issues- way better than Hillary or Barack, but let's be honest about his gun control positions. They are very much the Democrat positions. I find it hard to believe that he wouldn't sign any gun control legislation that crosses his desk. He's a free market guy, but he's not a bill of rights guy. Not that there are many bill of rights guys to choose from among the front runners.
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.