Free Republic

And indeed, my understanding is that they *do* live with that fact. I know that I have been within touching distance of several presidential candidates while carrying at least one firearm. Nobody got in my face about it, nor was it national news. Although on one occasion Giuliani’s handlers did ask me to conceal it, so as not to bother the sheeple.

What upsets me is the apparent flaunting of 18 USC 922(q) as a purported excuse for banning firearms from the curtilege of yesterday’s venue, including the street. Even though this “Gun Free School Zones Act” runs roughshod over states’ rights and has, in any event, been deemed clearly unconstitutional by SCOTUS.

Yes. Dan Itse.

Here’s the video for those who missed it.

http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=3572007&referralPlaylistId=playlist

Thank god for the Alaska delegates acknowledging Ron Paul’s nomination. The guy on stage was being disturbingly and studiously ignorant of the calls of “Ron Paul” when he enquired as to “any others”.

I look forward to McCain / Palin being nominated and elected, but I am appalled at the way that Ron Paul has been cast into the shadows and denied a pass to the convention.

Precisely how did 32 people manage to legally immigrate from the US into the US? Enquiring minds and all that...

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

This guy who wrote the original article in question may have drawn his conclusions as to the inappropriateness of Bloomberg's action for reasons that you and I might not agree with. That does not automatically make his conclusion wrong. For my part, I recall being appalled but unsurprised by the new policy within moments of hearing about it earlier today.

I have only read about a third of the messages in this thread, but must heartily second the opinions expressed in message 484. I am astonished to see so many supposedly right-thinking people on this board happily relinquish their rights and freedoms with nary a concern for the consequences. Perhaps it is that many on this board avoid NYC at all costs anyway and regard it as past salvation. If so, this is a remarkably narrow and short-sighted view.

So as of my reading this thread it still appears that the jury is out on whether he has exposed any of his 2nd amendment opinions. I hope he is pro-gun, but see no compelling evidence of this so far.

To the individual that asserts that Roberts is a constitutionalist, I point to this opinion which has been quoted several times in the threads...

Criminal Law 
Joined a unanimous opinion ruling that a police officer who searched the trunk of a car without saying that he was looking for evidence of a crime (the standard for constitutionality) still conducted the search legally, because there was a reasonable basis to think contraband was in the trunk, regardless of whether the officer was thinking in those terms. (U.S. v. Brown, 2004) 

It seems to me that this opinion is broadly inappropriate, but moreover gives the lie to any notion that he can be expected to uphold the constitution without let or bias.

Whatever his integrity, the frame of reference which he places on his constitutional interpretations is critical, and as such I am dismayed that there does not yet appear to be stronger evidence of a pro-gun stance.

Keeping my fingers crossed...

There are only two viable options remaining. Vote LP and lose. Abstain and lose. I'll be going with the former.

Oh, shit. I thought you were talking about the driver.

Never mind.

:-) About time. Self-initiated arrest?

It's confirmed. Fox News just reported that there is no more important news to cover than this.

"there's just no way to know" how a window got broken.

Do you think maybe it was the law enforcement folks that broke it? Just maybe?

Um, "semi-automatic hand grenade"?

Err, sarcasm. Sorry. FNC were getting very excited earlier about describing the (unknown) weapon as "semi-automatic"... so much so that I thought I must have been tuned to CNN... so I thought I would describe the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch as semi-automatic too. Now count to three.

What is all this stuff about giving a "way to escape"? I know that applies if you're defending your home, but I am unclear when this became true for police on the street.

We've gotten a little background, we're hearing that he is armed with a semi-automatic hand grenade. Our experts indicate that these are typically armour piercing and there is reason to believe it may be from Antioch.

HOT PURSUIT... NOW AT A STANDSTILL.

Where do we stand!?!? He's asking where we stand? We stand firmly on the break window, insert CS gas, await immediate developments front.

So let me see if I get this...

Options:

1. Create traffic chaos in the area and cause multiple injuries and fatalities by delaying emergency service response to other calls emerging in the area.

2. End it forcibly, with one injury or fatality.

Makes perfect sense to stick with option 1. Or, wait, no it doesn't.

Bret doesn't have the money behind him for advertising that Forrester has.

I have received one mailshot from Schundler and nine mailshots from Forrester. The one I got from Schundler was a solid platform statement. The nine I got from Forrester's campaign have been a mix of:

two (2) that focussed on a 30% property tax cut promise.

seven (7) that were a negative campaign against Schundler, and which quoted liberal news sources for its "proof" of Schundler's (supposedly) terrible record.

That Forrester would run a negative campaign against someone who might become his own party's candidate speaks volumes. That he is solidly anti-RKBA and Bret is largely pro-RKBA is also clear.

Actually I dont rememeber Weedpsort here at all.

Fair enough. Lemme find you a reference... OK, this is embarrassing, I can't find a good link. I remember reading hundreds of emails on the subject back when it happened, but I guess the pyrotechnics mailing lists in question are not archived.

To make it worse, the only viable reference I can find is a posting on the Hillary Clinton website!!! It's not even a very detailed description at that.

I will attempt to find a better explanation of the incident to which I referred, and post it here later. In the meantime, I quote the post that I could find.

"The Summer Fireworks Festival was held, or at least was attempted to be held, from July 27 to 31, 1998 in Weedsport, New York. This is a perfectly legal, permit-covered event that had been held twice before, successfully, in the same town. But the 1998 festival was doomed by Rudolph Giuliani before it even started. New York state troopers got wind of a "fireworks convention," set up roadblocks, and stopped cars coming and going to the festival, and confiscated fireworks from quite a few people. These roadblocks, interrogations, and confiscations will be challenged in court. At least eight people were arrested. Bob Kellner's entire truckload of fireworks, worth many thousands of dollars, was seized and destroyed. Many convention attendees immediately left for home."

"The Holiday Inn is upset because many people checked out sooner than they had planned. It's not the local police that caused the problems - it's primarily the New York state police and New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's goon squad called the "Fireworks Task Force." The Summer Fireworks Festival has been held twice before, in 1994 and 1996, at the same location, without any such incidents.

"Apparently this year, NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani read about the upcoming event and planned in April to sabotage it, even though Weedsport and Auburn are nowhere near his jurisdiction, and even thought the Summer Fireworks Festival is a completely legal event, covered by permits which were granted in advance."

You said: It can't have been much at all.

I am sure the folks involved would beg to differ. I was nowhere near the incident, but read many many independent reports of the events that formed a reliable picture, and contributed to their legal defense fund of those that were arrested on a variety of minor and spurious and in most cases allegedly bogus charges.

Another 1 vote for Bret here. Of course, with the electronic voting machines that they force us to use now, that may actually be 0.7 votes, or no vote, or int(rand(1.56)) votes, or...

welcome to FR

Thanks. Actually I am still trying to figure out how to get into the nolongerfreepingalone yahoo group, or if it is worth it to do so, since I have had singularly poor success finding anything other than LW loons and liberals here in PRNJ.

Ah, but back to the LW loon thing...

Fascist? Only LW loons call Giuliani a fascist.

Well, let's see... I've been accused many times by a "moderate republican" friend (who votes dem) of being to the right of Attila the Hun. This'll be the first time I have been accused of being even remotely left wing.

So far as Giuliani is concerned... Look at the NYC laws. Heck, forget the rule of law -- remember Weedsport 1998, when he usurped the local authorities to persecute innocent people, outside of the city, for some twisted photo-op? He is strongly anti-RKBA, whatever his current mask. Undoubtedly he is a shrewd politician, and I laud his ability to turn around violent crime and corruption in NYC. He speaks well, and presents a compelling persona. But his jack-booted methodologies have no place in the suburbs. And before you tell me he's changed his spots, please find and quote his statement apologizing for Weedsport. (You won't: to the best of my knowledge, there has been no apology.)

"Freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do and how you do it." Mayor Giuliani, New York Times, 17 March 1994