Rudy Giuliani gets the 2nd Amendment completely wrong in NRA speech [saved by a phone call]

Vanity ^ | ellery

[publiusF27]

In this Feb 2000 interview on Meet the Press, Rudy said, "...a person who wants to possess a handgun should pass a written test, should be able to pass a physical test in the actual use of the gun, and should have to demonstrate good moral character and a reason to have the gun. That those should be...essentially there should be a uniform law passed by Congress that says that every state has to administer that...."

He went on to say that had been his position since 1980. I have not heard him say anything to reverse this position.

I'm not sure I can prove that I need my handguns, so I won't vote for Rudy unless I hear a clear and public reversal of this position.

[N. Theknow]

The "impromptu" phone call from his wife was every bit as lame as Hillary's "I come too far" speech.

Both were playing their audiences for fools.

[ctdonath2]

Nicely put.

[USMCPOP]

“The real 2nd Amendment test for GOP candidates:

1. How many guns do you own?

2. Name them (make and caliber).

3. When was the last time you fired each one and why?”

Graduate exam:

1. Based on our current troops’ experience with small arms in Iraq and Afghanistan, please expound on the issues of terminal effectiveness and reliability.

2. Considering the ease with which criminal enterprises can smuggle arms into the country, does it make sense to disarm or restrict largely law-abiding and responsible citizens from possessing weapons?

3. If you support the right of properly qualified citizens to keep “sporting arms”, should we be concerned about supposedly unarmed ducks migrating across our borders without proper documentation?

Extra credit: When checking a firearm to make sure it’s not loaded, which end of the barrel should you look into? (Hint: The preferred answer to this may vary according to your political affiliation.)

[robertpaulsen]

What part of "shall be secure" don't you understand?

You can have my possessions when you pry my cold, dead fingers off them.

[tpaine]

"After all the second amendment is a freedom every bit as important as the other freedoms in the first ten amendments. Just think of the language of it -- 'the people shall be secure'
--let's see, this is my wife calling..."
(talks to and about his wife) (then he resumes with a subject change) "...but the parking decision offers an excellent example..."

Beware the cold dead fingers of the man who claims conservative credentials, while he argues that our US Constitution was not intended to protect our individual rights from state or local government infringements.
These men claim that 'We, -as a society', decide which rights we will protect --- And if 'We' choose not to protect your right to do [whatever], so be it. If and when a majority of the people decide that we should protect a right, then we will. Given that we're a self-governing nation, there's nothing to stop the majority from deciding this.

--- For instance, if there's nothing in a state constitution about the right to keep and bear arms [and States can change their constitutions by super-majority decisions], - then --- States can ban all guns if they so chose.

[mh9558]

Thats the thing it won’t hurt him. The press is more interested in the phonecall aspect of it. They could care less that he got the second amendment all wrong. They hate the second amendment as it is and wish it could be done away with anyway. So rude and obnoxious wins out over stupid, (which he happens to be both) but Rudy wins. He’s a New Yorker. They’re supposed to be rude and obnoxious, and everybody knows that. ;)