What's with Giuliani making pro-gun statements all of a sudden?

[MASTEROFMALICE]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,304838,00.html

LEBANON, N.H. — Republican presidential front-runner Rudy Giuliani is leaving the door open to allowing the blind and physically disabled to carry guns.

During a town hall meeting in northwestern New Hampshire Tuesday night, Giuliani told a former police officer blinded in the line of duty and concerned about the former New York City mayor's stance on guns, "You don't have to worry."

"You have a constitutional right, that is protected, to bear and carry arms. It is the Second Amendment," Giuliani told about 200 attendees in a high school gymnasium in Lebanon. "If someone disagrees with that, you have to get the Constitution changed."

He added that he believes in only three restrictions for those wishing to exercise their Second Amendment right — a previous criminal record, a history of mental instability and an age requirement.

Kenyon Tuthill, 61, who served as a Suffolk County, N.H., police officer until his injury, told FOX News that he was satisfied with Giuliani's answer.

During his two terms as mayor, Giuliani supported strict gun laws at both the local and national level and advocated the federal assault weapons ban that expired in 2004. But as a presidential candidate, he vows to protect Second Amendment rights at the federal level allowing state and local authorities to determine their own "reasonable" restrictions.

New Hampshire, the Live Free Or Die State, is known for its limited gun-control laws, including no waiting period for purchases, no background checks for buyers of rifles and shotguns and no restrictions on children under 18 possessing firearms, according to the Brady Campaign, a gun-control advocacy group.

But the rural state with lots of sportsmen and a high rate of gun ownership annually has fewer than 100 total murders, including non-gun crimes, and Second Amendment rights are hugely important to constituents of both parties.

New Hampshire allows the blind to possess firearms, Tuthill said.

 

[Shadowangel]

Because he's running for president, and being a republican anti would wipe out any chance of your being elected.

 

[JWarren]

I'm about to go Waaaaay out on a limb here. Please bear with me.


Obviously, it is political season. People say things to get elected. No surprises there.


But...


Politicians are interviewing for a Job. They are negotiating with the American People as to what they will work to do.

Giuliani has a history of anti-gun actions. That worked in NYC and likely met a lot of support. It was probably demanded of him in NYC.

Now, he knows that isn't going to fly in a campaign for the White House. I see him as attempting to make a "contract" with gun owners. I see him as trying to make a deal.

I am not saying that he has suddenly become pro-gun. Not by a long shot. But his statements on record do hold him-- to a degree-- accountable to the "deal."

Do I buy it? No. But if he DOES get the nomination-- or if he does become President, the very fact that he made those statements has already put us in a stronger position.

I can be critical of him on many levels. But let's not pretend that anytime we have leaders (or wanna-be leaders) making solid, pro-gun statements, isn't a good thing for us all. They have an audience and have media outlets. Even if insincere, they are USING that media exposure to give the entire populace our message that the "RKBA shall not be infringed."

That message needs to be repeated loudly and often. I don't care who is saying it.


Now... that said...

He never said that he supports ALL firearms. A lot of people try to draw lines between Grand-dad's double-barrel and my AK-47. Ask Kerry about that.


I hate to say it.... but.....


If it seems that he race is between Hillary and Giuliani--- Which I personally think it will be, I would have to vote for Giuliani-- at least he IS trying to make a deal with us. Sure, a piece of my soul would die that day. But it is better than putting in one that we KNOW is out to get you and has made no truces with you.


Fred needs to start acting like he actually WANTS to be president.



All this said... IN BEFORE THE LOCK!


-- John

 

[ozwyn]

he is hoping if he says that enough we will all forget the public security camera and outrageous gun laws of new york

 

[joab]

"If someone disagrees with that, you have to get the Constitution changed."

Granted I am someone who has a habit of reading into statements, especially political statements

But it seems to me that this kind of statement made at a liberal indoctrination center ranks right up there with telling the people of Iraq that the only way to better their lives and get US support is to overthrow their dictator

The difference here is that there would actually be support for their actions

 

[TexasRifleman]

I know we're not supposed to have any political thread, but with an election year coming it's going to happen more and more.

Mods, Derek, Oleg? Any thoughts to an election year subforum?

We are gonna be tempted more and more to talk about this stuff.

Oh, and IBTL

 

[strat81]

That about sums up Rudy.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

Oh, hell, this WOULD be viewed as political, wouldn't it?

All this said... IN BEFORE THE LOCK!

 

[JWarren]

Mods, Derek, Oleg? Any thoughts to an election year subforum?

I have to agree with TexasRifleMan here.

I think THR members are going to have to show some restraint and prove we can handle it, but I think that gunowners would benefit from this.


Early on, I learned a LOT about what candidates had done that slipped under the radar regarding RKBA from here. As a place where a lot of "newbies" come and learn, it would be a good idea to get the facts out.


Let's face it... As gunowners, we need all the support we can get. Sometimes political discussion CREATES it.


-- John

 

[GEM]

Rudy and Mitt - they will say what it takes.

If you vote for Rudy, you get a basically antigun person who might be more intelligent and a better decision maker than the current president (not hard - heh?). If you vote for Mitt - you get a total hypocrite on many dimensions. Rudy seems to be sticking to his guns (haha) on abortion and gays. Unlike Mitt.

Doesn't make any difference, GWB has so poisoned the well that Hillary is a guarantee. Sad, isn't it?

 

[JWarren]

The lunatics are running the asylum-- but let's not forget-- it WAS an asylum to begin with.

-- John

 

[jerkface11]

It's not like Rudy is the only republican running. Huckabee is an ACTUAL conservative not just some guy with a little (R) next to his name.

 

[Tyris]

Giuliana is just more NYC trash.

I'll be staying home if he's on the ticket.

-T

 

[ozwyn]

That pic Tyris posted speaks more than any number of speeches and election statements in my book.

 

[Cougfan2]

I'll be staying home if he's on the ticket.

Tyris, I can completely understand your sentiment, but as the saying goes, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

I will vote for ANY of the current Repub contenders that become the nominee. If that's Gulliani, I'll hold my nose and vote for him.

ABH (Anybody But Hillary)

 

[esq_stu]

He's trying to sound conservative on domestic issues and he's not saying anything that can be used after the election to pressure him one way or the other on gun control legislation. There is very little risk for him to say what he is saying. Fence-sitting centrists that could go either D or R, he could pick up a few blue-state votes during the general election. As an election strategy, it's a good one. It means nothing in terms of what he'll do as president.

 

[jlbraun]

Ibtl!

 

[Hokkmike]

When it comes down to him and Hillary are you really going to vote against him?


(I didn't think so)


He is just trying to consolidate his base. It is not what they say now but rather what they do later that matters.

 

[TexasRifleman]

When it comes down to him and Hillary are you really going to vote against him?

I don't believe it will end that way. I still think Romney will pass Rudy and take the party nomination.

Gonna be interesting for sure.

 

[Baba Louie]

While I agree with the words spoken, Better to judge politicians on past performance rather than the lies they state whilst running for office.

Having said that, when given two poor horses in a race on which to place your bets... choose the one who'll probably give you a better run for your money.

 

[sully0812]

Here is my suggestion.

As a community, we ask Rudy to put his money where his mouth is. If he is truly pro 2A, then he needs to demonstrate that by actively working to restore 2A rights in NYC, where he has stifled them in the past.

If he cannot do that, then we cannot trust his statements. plain and simple.

I tried to email him (or rather his campaign) about this very thing last week, but I was unable to find an email address that wasn't about fundraising.

Anyone have some contact info for him?

 

[TexasRifleman]

As a community, we ask Rudy to put his money where his mouth is. If he is truly pro 2A, then he needs to demonstrate that by actively working to restore 2A rights in NYC, where he has stifled them in the past.

He's not going to do that, read his statement carefully.

He still thinks states and localities can do what they want, he only opposes anti stuff at the Federal level.

He really isn't saying anything new.

He still thinks Bloomberg can do whatever he wants.

ut as a presidential candidate, he vows to protect Second Amendment rights at the federal level allowing state and local authorities to determine their own "reasonable" restrictions.

We know what he thinks is "reasonable".

 

[SaxonPig]

I got a PM from a moderator telling me not to post anything political. Has that rule changed?

 

[TexasRifleman]

No, we're just misbehaving I'm afraid.

 

[bogie]

Guys, it's a matter of "which way is the wind blowing?" In New York, the voters WANTED more gun control. So he gave it to them. He's discovering that the Republican party doesn't want it. Fine. He can deal with that.

He reminds me of Clinton. He checks out the numbers on the polls, and goes with the majority. Now, some of you'd be bitching if our duly elected representative didn't go with the majority, right?

Now, to me, it's looking like it'll come down to a contest between him and Clinton... Personally, I'm voting against Clinton. I don't think that Rudy will do as much damage as she would. If I vote against BOTH of them, I suspect that Clinton will benefit from that. Hence, I'll probably vote for Rudy.