Giuliani"™s speech today to the NRA -- and more importantly, how that speech is received -- is a big moment for the campaign. His record on guns is potentially more problematic with conservatives than his past statements on abortion or gay rights. Will the audience buy his argument that gun control should be left up to the states (which, by the way, is similar to what Howard Dean said on the issue in "™04)? Rudy isn"™t the sole Republican presidential candidate who will be there. McCain, Thompson, Giuliani, Huckabee, and Gingrich (in that order) are addressing the NRA conference in DC today. Plus, Romney ("œvarmits"!), Richardson (a Democrat!), and Hunter will speak to the confab by videotape.
The NRA just got a scathing phone call from me. After faithfully supporting the NRA with contributions for nearly 50 years,they will get nothing from me this year. All further requests for contributions will be returned with a copy of my check made out to GOA.
Pretty soon the case that Rudy Baby filed against US gun makers will go to trial.
This just might make you puke your guts out even worse.....
Yes, everyone, this is an actual photo from back in the early 80's. I lifted this photo from a 1911 .45acp website/forum that I visit from time to time.
Here's old Rudy Baby at the mic in DC speaking out in support of gun control. See who's behind him? The even more sleazy, Chuck Schumer. Below Schumer is James Brady in the wheelchair. In back of Brady is an unknown/unidentified supporter.
THIS MAKES ME $*&#&@# SICK!!!!!!!!!!!
There is NO WAY I'd cast a vote for Guiliani after seeing this!!!!![:@]
The NRA just got a scathing phone call from me. After faithfully supporting the NRA with contributions for nearly 50 years,they will get nothing from me this year. All further requests for contributions will be returned with a copy of my check made out to GOA.
Why? Why should NRA not provide a forum for all of the candidates to state their positions on gun control so that members can make a fair assessment of those statements?
Quote:
Pretty soon the case that Rudy Baby filed against US gun makers will go to trial.
Do you have a source? I thought the case was no longer pending.
"Why? Why should NRA not provide a forum for all of the candidates to state their positions on gun control so that members can make a fair assessment of those statements?"
Yep, according to your standards they should also give Edwards, Klinton and Obama a forum so that theycan claim credibility as moderate gun lovers.
"Do you have a source? I thought the case was no longer pending."
"But even as the former New York mayor strives to burnish his Second Amendment credentials at the gathering in Washington, a panel of federal judges in his home town will be hearing arguments on the lawsuit that Giuliani filed seven years ago aimed at punishing the nation's gun manufacturers for violent crimes involving firearms."
"Why? Why should NRA not provide a forum for all of the candidates to state their positions on gun control so that members can make a fair assessment of those statements?"
Yep, accoding to your standards they should also give Edwards, Klinton and Obama a forum so that theycan claim credibility as moderate gun lovers.
Frankly, I see it as a forum where Republican voters (who currently seem to have Giuliani ahead in the polls) can see the difference between the various candidates on this issue. Perhaps if they see through what he's saying, they'll switch to a more "pro" candidate. This is, after all, a society where we try not to censor viewpoints that we disagree with, but try to expose them to the air so that everyone else will also see how stupid those viewpoints are... Kind of the polar opposite of Franklin's view that it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt...
Quote:
"Do you have a source? I thought the case was no longer pending."
Yes, today's Washington Post.
Make that yesterday's Washington Post.
"But even as the former New York mayor strives to burnish his Second Amendment credentials at the gathering in Washington, a panel of federal judges in his home town will be hearing arguments on the lawsuit that Giuliani filed seven years ago aimed at punishing the nation's gun manufacturers for violent crimes involving firearms."
That's not the same as "going to trial soon." If I'm reading it correctly, that means the case has been dismissed, that Mayor Bloomberg filed an appeal, and that the 2nd Circuit is going to hear arguments about whether the case was properly dismissed under the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Hopefully, the 2nd Circuit judges can read plain English, and will affirm the dismissal.
Rudy is an ass. There is no way "gun control" should be left up to the states. Should freedom of speech be determined by the individual state???
If it is left up to the states, I guarantee you it will become more and more restrictive as precedents are reached in various states prompting ongoing and perpetual litigation in all other states. One day we may even have the federal gov withholding monies if a certain state hasn't restricted their respctive gun control to certain point.
__________________
Looney tunes deductive reasoning:
--Me smell Mohican burning
--Me last Mohican
--Must be me!!!
--EEEOOOWWW!!!!!
Rudy is an ass. There is no way "gun control" should be left up to the states. Should freedom of speech be determined by the individual state???
If it is left up to the states, I guarantee you it will become more and more restrictive as precedents are reached in various states prompting ongoing and perpetual litigation in all other states. One day we may even have the federal gov withholding monies if a certain state hasn't restricted their respctive gun control to certain point.
The problem is, that is the way the system is set up right now. The 2nd Amendment is a restriction on the Federal Government, not on State Governments, at least until the Supreme Court rules that the 2nd Amendment applies to the States by operation of the 14th Amendment. (As it has for all of the Bill of Rights except the 2nd.) This is one of the reasons I'llsupport the Republican nominee for President over the Democrat nominee, regardless of who the Republican is. The Republican nominee is more likely to nominate Supreme Court justices who will interpret the 2nd Amendment as protecting "individual" RKBA.
Note that most State Constitutions also have an equivalent of the 2nd Amendment. The Texas Constitution says:
Quote:
Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defence of himself or the State.
I did not realize that the application of the 2nd amendment country-wide is currently different than the rest of the bill of rights. I guess that's what enables some local governments (NYC)to restrict gun ownership further than what the constitution would generally allow, yeah??.
Seems backward to think you need further "process" to apply any constitutional amendment to any part of the country unlessexception is madeby the language of the amendment itself.
Generally IALWAYS base my vote on who I think is going to protect the 2nd amendment best, although, I'd rather not in some cases because it forces me to ignore other issues I feel strongly about from time to time. I wish it was a non-issue and people were not such idiots that many would link gun control to crime...but...so it goes. Still, Rudy baby is off the mark
__________________
Looney tunes deductive reasoning:
--Me smell Mohican burning
--Me last Mohican
--Must be me!!!
--EEEOOOWWW!!!!!
You're right, it seems rather odd. The 14th Amendment has been used by the courts to apply most of the bill of rights to the States. Prior to judicial interpretation of the 14th Amendment, the 1st Amendment protections of freedom of the press, free speech and assembly, 4th Amendment rules about unreasonable searches and seizures, etc., etc., ONLY applied to the Federal government. Until the same ruling is made in regard to the 2nd Amendment, it remains as a restriction only on the Federal Government.
You can go to this cite to see what your state's constitution says about RKBA:
You're in luck... West Virginia's is even better than Texas':
Quote:
West Virginia Constitution Article III, Section 22
A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, and for lawful hunting and recreational use.
NRA Speeches today
[:@]
