Giuliani Tries Reassuring Voters on Gun Control
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. . . . .
Giuliani's answers are all over the map on guns as I discussed here. I have a hard time believing almost anything he wants to say on guns. One time he gives big qualifications, the next time he seems to believe that there are only three reasons for someone not being able to own a gun. If true, that would rule out most gun control.
Labels: 2008PresidentialRace, Giuliani, GunControl
posted by John Lott at 12:46 AM
3 Comments:
After reading that article I want to move up there. They have more relaxed laws than we do here in MS.
You’re right about Rudy being all over the place on the 2nd amendment. All of the other candidates have a better record on the 2nd amendment and Rudy is just trying to put a few minds at ease about the issue. I may be wrong, but has he hasn’t answered any questions about supporting another assault weapons ban. It’s easy to just say that you support the 2nd amendment. Even the Dems say that, but a lot of them want to get rid of so-called “assault weapons”
He needs to unequivocally state any limitations on the right. Ask him if he believes the right can be suspended during times of natural disaster or insurrection.
Does the right apply in the house and outside the home equally?
Are certain guns "bad", such as pistols or semi-auto's and not protected.
Does the right cover individuals or the collective right of a "state"?
He'll never come clean IMO.
I don't find Rudy reassuring on anything. He's too much of a weasel.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home