Posted on 02/07/2007 2:40:44 PM PST by Jim Robinson
HANNITY: Let me move on. And the issue of guns has come up a lot. When people talk about Mayor Giuliani, New York City had some of the toughest gun laws in the entire country. Do you support the right of people to carry handguns?
GIULIANI: I understand the Second Amendment. I support it. People have the right to bear arms. When I was mayor of New York, I took over at a very, very difficult time. We were averaging about 2,000 murders a year, 10,000...
HANNITY: You inherited those laws, the gun laws in New York?
GIULIANI: Yes, and I used them. I used them to help bring down homicide. We reduced homicide, I think, by 65-70 percent. And some of it was by taking guns out of the streets of New York City.
So if you're talking about a city like New York, a densely populated area like New York, I think it's appropriate. You might have different laws other places, and maybe a lot of this gets resolved based on different states, different communities making decisions. After all, we do have a federal system of government in which you have the ability to accomplish that.
HANNITY: So you would support the state's rights to choose on specific gun laws?
GIULIANI: Yes, I mean, a place like New York that is densely populated, or maybe a place that is experiencing a serious crime problem, like a few cities are now, kind of coming back, thank goodness not New York, but some other cities, maybe you have one solution there and in another place, more rural, more suburban, other issues, you have a different set of rules.
HANNITY: But generally speaking, do you think it's acceptable if citizens have the right to carry a handgun?
GIULIANI: It's not only -- I mean, it's part of the Constitution. People have the right to bear arms. Then the restrictions of it have to be reasonable and sensible. You can't just remove that right. You've got to regulate, consistent with the Second Amendment.
HANNITY: How do you feel about the Brady bill and assault ban?
GIULIANI: I was in favor of that as part of the crime bill. I was in favor of it because I thought that it was necessary both to get the crime bill passed and also necessary with the 2,000 murders or so that we were looking at, 1,800, 1,900, to 2,000 murders, that I could use that in a tactical way to reduce crime. And I did.
RinoButtKisserFNC?
"I guess we'll see just how much sway the extreme Conservatives in the party have. I think you're going to be disappointed."
We are here at the pleasure of the web sites owner.
Not the other way around.
Giuliani is a good man who just doesn't get it. Places with high crime rates need more guns not fewer and the government has very little to say about it if it wants to be consistent with the contitution
All of the people you've described already own and carry firearms. They enter businesses and churches with them, and cause hella damage. Seems the government offices are, as of now, the only entities that can employ armed security. Doesn't it give ya the creeps thinking that they want to keep it that way?
No, not all our guns.
Just the ones that matter.
Assault weapons and pistols.
I truly don't think the Miers nomination and this are comparable. Good try though. At the end of the day, the Conservative base will do what's in the best interest of the country. And if it's between Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton, they will vote for Rudy. Until then, all they can do is whine because there just isn't a candidate out there that fits the bill.
Well, if Rudi doesn't win the primary, then I guess the Republicans should just nominate Hillary. The Lizard Queen won't seem so bad if she has an R next to her name.
About 120 years ago.
When is the last time a mayor was elected president without holding federal office first?
Never.
So being pro-life, anti-amnesty and pro-gun are now extreme?
Seven year olds used to have shooting leagues. I was a 10 year old plinkin' away with a .22 in the cub scouts.
Severely retarted people don't understand what a gun is.
Mentally-ill people might should be in custody already.
Convicted felons who have paid their due should be restored to their full rights.
So you think seven year olds, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry a firearm? Do you believe a business has the right to prohit anyone carrying a firearm from entering their premises? How about a church or government office?
Our right to carry arms is the 'Law of the Land". -- So yes, businessmen are obligated to support & defend the 2nd, as is everyone that lives & works in the USA.
And yes - even children, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry those arms that their guardians & protectors deem appropriate.
No question. We have been richly polluted by liberals and queasy middle-roaders who have sold us nearly into liberal slavery already.
Hogwash! What's to stop them now? You think they're going to collect them legitimately? You think the drug traders on the southern border don't already have them? You think the gansters across America don't already have these arsenals plus much more?
It's only us law-abiding 'fools' that have been left with hunting rifles, pistols and shotguns and guess what? RUDY WANTS THEM TOO!
Jim, there's a core of FR Rudybots who don't share your opinion.
"If Jim Robinson wants this to become an anti-Guiliani site, fine...let him just come out and say it."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1780462/posts?page=112#112
The Republicans made it impossible for me to turn out in '06.
They are making it equally impossible for me to turn out in '08.
The Republicans made it impossible for me to turn out in '06.
They are making it equally impossible for me to turn out in '08.
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.