| Author |
Message |
|
nyffman
|
Post subject: Reasonable Rudy is in!  Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:09 pm |
|
| Senior Member |
 |
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:19 pm
Posts: 265
Location: MN
|
Quote: He reiterated his support for "reasonable" gun control laws, civil unions for gays, and establishing a way for illegal immigrants to earn citizenship.
What is the definition of reasonable Rudy? Well, that depends on who I'm talking to at the time.
_________________
Most problems are caused by solutions
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Fubar
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:36 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 2:12 pm
Posts: 289
|
Apparently he was recently on a FOXNEWS show, Captain's Quarters provides a transcript:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/ ... 009098.php
Quote: HANNITY: You inherited the gun laws in New York.
GIULIANI: Yeah. And I used them to help bring down homicide. We reduced homicide I think by 65, 70%. And some of it was by taking guns out of the streets of New York City. So if you are 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. 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?
GIUILANI: Yeah. 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. Thank goodness not New York but some other cities. Maybe you have one solution there and in other place more rural, more suburban, other issues you have a different set of rule.
HANNITY: Generally speaking do you think it's acceptable if citizens have the right to carry a handgun?
GIULIANI: It's part of the constitution. People have the right to bear arms. Then restrictions have to be reasonable and sensible. You can't just remove that right. You got to regulate consistent with the second amendment. So apparently he completely supports the second amendment unless it's in an urban area with high crime.
Yah, that makes perfect sense. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Srigs
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 pm |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:40 am
Posts: 3752
Location: East Suburbs
|
Fubar wrote: Apparently he was recently on a FOXNEWS show, Captain's Quarters provides a transcript: http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/ ... 009098.phpQuote: HANNITY: You inherited the gun laws in New York.
GIULIANI: Yeah. And I used them to help bring down homicide. We reduced homicide I think by 65, 70%. And some of it was by taking guns out of the streets of New York City. So if you are 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. 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?
GIUILANI: Yeah. 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. Thank goodness not New York but some other cities. Maybe you have one solution there and in other place more rural, more suburban, other issues you have a different set of rule.
HANNITY: Generally speaking do you think it's acceptable if citizens have the right to carry a handgun?
GIULIANI: It's part of the constitution. People have the right to bear arms. Then restrictions have to be reasonable and sensible. You can't just remove that right. You got to regulate consistent with the second amendment. So apparently he completely supports the second amendment unless it's in an urban area with high crime. Yah, that makes perfect sense. It works so well also. 
_________________
Srigs
Side Guard Holsters
"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking" - George S. Patton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ramoel
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:46 pm |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 8:52 pm
Posts: 826
Location: MN
|
Sort of a Hillary Lite? 
_________________
Ron
NRA Life Member
USS Bristol DD857
_________________________
If life was fair, Robins couldn't eat worms...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ttousi
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:40 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 11:20 am
Posts: 3311
Location: St. Paul, MN.
|
Quote: HANNITY: You inherited the gun laws in New York.
GIULIANI: Yeah. And I used them to help bring down homicide. We reduced homicide I think by 65, 70%. And some of it was by taking guns out of the streets of New York City. Reduced homicides by 65-70 % I may not watch the news much but even I wouldn't have missed the National Headline Making News Story that this would have generated.
Or did I 
_________________
http://is.gd/37LKr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sigman
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:16 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:20 am
Posts: 1317
Location: Racine, MN
|
|
I listened to the jerk last night. He was rationalizing trying to play to the anti-gun urbanites and the pro-gun suburbanites. Basically saying gun control is necessary in large cities. I didn't know that living in a large city caused you to lose your rights. He is a jackass and would never get my vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jdege
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:04 pm |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:23 pm
Posts: 1419
Location: SE MPLS
|
Fubar wrote: So apparently he completely supports the second amendment unless it's in an urban area with high crime. Yah, that makes perfect sense. I'm strongly in favor of allowing states and local communities to regulate firearms, provided that the specific regulations don't violate fundamental rights.
I believe that a local community should be able to forbid discharge of firearms between 9:00 PM and 9:00 AM.
I believe that a local community or a state should be able to forbid discharge of firearms within 500 feet of an occupied residence.
I'm willing to listen to arguments that a state should be able to require permits for the carry of firearms, provided that the issuance is according to objective standards, and is not subject to the discretion of the issuing authority.
Rudy thinks that NYC should be able to regulate guns. So do I. But I do not think that NYC should be able to issue permits arbitrarily, according to the whim of a politician or elected official.
It'd be nice to see Rudy address that point. But I find it exceedingly unlikely that any interviewer will ever ask him to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mostlylawabidingcitizen
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:09 am |
|
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 7:54 am
Posts: 1242
|
jdege wrote: I believe that a local community should be able to forbid discharge of firearms between 9:00 PM and 9:00 AM.
I believe that a local community or a state should be able to forbid discharge of firearms within 500 feet of an occupied residence.
I'm willing to listen to arguments that a state should be able to require permits for the carry of firearms, provided that the issuance is according to objective standards, and is not subject to the discretion of the issuing authority.
Rudy thinks that NYC should be able to regulate guns. So do I. But I do not think that NYC should be able to issue permits arbitrarily, according to the whim of a politician or elected official.
It'd be nice to see Rudy address that point. But I find it exceedingly unlikely that any interviewer will ever ask him to. Not sure if these "I believes" are yours or Rudy's,
But no discharge between 9-9? No deer/duck hunting? No shooting criminals in daylight? No outdoor lowlight practice? 
No discharge within 500'? No shooting criminals in town, need to drag them to the woods to shoot them? 
Rudy looks like Bush from NEW YORK CITY! I was surprised Hanity let him off so easy. Really sad that some of the best "conservatives" that can be put forth are so so liberal.
Mostly-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nyffman
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:34 am |
|
| Senior Member |
|
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:19 pm
Posts: 265
Location: MN
|
mostlylawabidingcitizen wrote: Rudy looks like Bush from NEW YORK CITY! I was surprised Hanity let him off so easy. Really sad that some of the best "conservatives" that can be put forth are so so liberal. Mostly- Hannity is an idiot. If he doesn't have his Republican talking points in front of him, he has not idea what to say. And...........Rudy is a running as a Republican. Sooo, putting 1 and 1 together what do you expect?
_________________
Most problems are caused by solutions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jdege
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:43 am |
|
| Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:23 pm
Posts: 1419
Location: SE MPLS
|
mostlylawabidingcitizen wrote: Not sure if these "I believes" are yours or Rudy's, But no discharge between 9-9? No deer/duck hunting? No shooting criminals in daylight? No outdoor lowlight practice? I don't think it a violation of fundamental rights for a town to forbid the making of loud noises while most people are sleeping. Quote: No discharge within 500'? No shooting criminals in town, need to drag them to the woods to shoot them? Self-defense is one thing, target practice is another. Quote: Rudy looks like Bush from NEW YORK CITY! I was surprised Hanity let him off so easy. Really sad that some of the best "conservatives" that can be put forth are so so liberal. I'm just pissed that pretty much all of our interviewers will let a politician off with using a weasel-word like "reasonable" without exploring just what the politician thinks "reasonable" means.
Like I said, I support the idea that local communities should be able to impose "reasonable" regulations on the use and ownership of firearms. But my idea of reasonable does not include a carry permit system that operates at the whim of appointed bureaucrats. It is, in my view, a violation of the fundamental right to due process.
Rudy, for all of his claims of reasonableness, seems to have no problem whatsoever with the arbitrary nature of NYC firearms licensing. Or if he does, he's not mentioned it. And Hannity didn't ask.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ttousi
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:50 am |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 11:20 am
Posts: 3311
Location: St. Paul, MN.
|
jdege wrote: Fubar wrote: So apparently he completely supports the second amendment unless it's in an urban area with high crime. Yah, that makes perfect sense. I'm strongly in favor of allowing states and local communities to regulate politicians, provided that the specific regulations don't violate fundamental rights. I believe that a local community should be able to forbid politicians between 9:00 PM and 9:00 AM. I believe that a local community or a state should be able to forbid politicians within 500 feet of an occupied residence. That's better.......... 
_________________
http://is.gd/37LKr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sigman
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:15 am |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:20 am
Posts: 1317
Location: Racine, MN
|
ttousi wrote: jdege wrote: Fubar wrote: So apparently he completely supports the second amendment unless it's in an urban area with high crime. Yah, that makes perfect sense. I'm strongly in favor of allowing states and local communities to regulate politicians, provided that the specific regulations don't violate fundamental rights. I believe that a local community should be able to forbid politicians between 9:00 PM and 9:00 AM. I believe that a local community or a state should be able to forbid politicians within 500 feet of an occupied residence. That's better.......... Much better!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Brit in MN
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:28 pm |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:32 pm
Posts: 1803
Location: Woodbury
|
It's already illegal to discharge a firearm in Ramsey County AT ANY TIME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Srigs
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:42 pm |
|
| Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:40 am
Posts: 3752
Location: East Suburbs
|
A Brit in MN wrote: It's already illegal to discharge a firearm in Ramsey County AT ANY TIME Most of Woodbury also but rest of Washington CO is more reasonable.
_________________
Srigs
Side Guard Holsters
"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking" - George S. Patton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Brit in MN
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:58 pm |
|
| Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:32 pm
Posts: 1803
Location: Woodbury
|
Srigs wrote: A Brit in MN wrote: It's already illegal to discharge a firearm in Ramsey County AT ANY TIME Most of Woodbury also but rest of Washington CO is more reasonable. Don't confuse hunting regulations with feel good laws my young Padawan
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.
All times are UTC - 6 hours
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
