Giuliani on "gun control"... Thoughts?

[Dwight K. Schrute]

"I do not think the government should cut off the right to bear arms. My position for many years has been that just as a motorist must have a license, a gun owner should be required to have one as well. Anyone wanting to own a gun should have to pass a written exam that shows that they know how to use a gun, that they’re intelligent enough and responsible enough to handle a gun."

Source: Boston Globe, p. A4 Mar 21, 2000

[seamusTX]

I don't know who voted for "This will prevent morons from acquiring arms," but you are wrong unless you mean moron according to the definition of a mentally retarded person with a mental age of 8 to 12 years.

No law can stop a determined person from acquiring a weapon. In countries where civilian firearms ownership is extremely limited, criminals still acquire weapons, just as they acquire illegal drugs and other contraband.

- Jim

[stevie_d_64]

Rudy Gulianni will not be President of the United States...Not just because of his criticality of the 2nd Amendment...

His explanations and moderation of his gun-control agenda, and voting record in regards to this issue alone speaks volumes...

Sure, he's a personable guy...I might even have a beer with him...But I wouldn't vote for him...That simple...

[nitrogen]

In a perfect world licensing would help, yes.

The problem is, it makes it easy for an anti-gun licensing body (like in New Jersey) to arbitrarily keep people from getting guns. The NJ State Police has a history of this, for instance.

My standard response to anyone stating this is replacing 2nd amendment with first amendment.

"I do not think the government should cut off the right freedom of religion. My position for many years has been that just as a motorist must have a license, a preacher should be required to have one as well. Anyone wanting to preach should have to pass a written exam that shows that they are moral, , that they’re intelligent enough and responsible enough to preach."

That's scary, isn't it? IT's just as scary to those of us that take our 2a rights serously.

[stevie_d_64]

In a perfect world licensing would help, yes.

The problem is, it makes it easy for an anti-gun licensing body (like in New Jersey) to arbitrarily keep people from getting guns. The NJ State Police has a history of this, for instance.

My standard response to anyone stating this is replacing 2nd amendment with first amendment.

"I do not think the government should cut off the right freedom of religion. My position for many years has been that just as a motorist must have a license, a preacher should be required to have one as well. Anyone wanting to preach should have to pass a written exam that shows that they are moral, , that they’re intelligent enough and responsible enough to preach."

That's scary, isn't it? IT's just as scary to those of us that take our 2a rights serously.

Sure you don't have any William Wallace in ya???

You pick a good fight!

Love it!!!

[KBCraig]

Here's some interesting reading on another candidate:

http://conservativesagainstfred.wordpre ... te-record/

I'm afraid too many traditional conservatives are buying this dog by his bark, without seeing how he hunts.

[lrb111]

Licensing =prohibitions =violators =collections = criminals

The U.N. wants our guns, and there are many that agree with them in our government.

see tag with malmo knotted gun....

[jimlongley]

In a perfect world licensing would help, yes.

Nope, even in a perfect world, it would be licensing a right and still would not have anyt effect on criminals determined to obtain illegal firearms.

I have written to Giuliani and offered him the same deal as any other anti rights types who offer licencing as some sort of panacea - he can go ahead and license gun users on the same basis as car drivers, as long as it is on the SAME basis as car drivers. The fees garnered from licenses shall be used to build and maintain ubiquitous public shooting ranges, and use of those ranges will be limited to, but open to, all licensed shooters without regard for time of day, day of year, etc, just like public highways.

Of course the same conditions for unlicensed possession and use will obtain just as they do today, private lands and facilities will be unaffected, as will ownership of any and all kinds of firearms up to and including the largest imagineable cannon (compare to cars that can drive WELL OVER the speed limits.)

And of course anyone will be able to purchase a firearm without having to show any more ID than a car purchaser does today.

Ah yes, a pleasant can of worms to contemplate.

Of course Rudi has lived up to my expectations and never bothered to reply.

[Renegade]

In a perfect world licensing would help, yes.

Well in a perfect world, there is no need for gun control of any kind.

Last time I time I checked, a motorist could buy all the cars they wanted without any kind of license or written exam. The license in only needed to take the car onto public roads and property, and the license is also good for all 50 states and many foreign countries. Is that the kind of license Rudy is proposing?

[nitrogen]

In a perfect world licensing would help, yes.

Well in a perfect world, there is no need for gun control of any kind.

Last time I time I checked, a motorist could buy all the cars they wanted without any kind of license or written exam. The license in only needed to take the car onto public roads and property, and the license is also good for all 50 states and many foreign countries. Is that the kind of license Rudy is proposing?

If so, I might almost sorta consider it.
Lawdog made a great post on the subject:
http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2007 ... kyack.html
(PG-13)

[Dwight K. Schrute]

In a perfect world licensing would help, yes.

The problem is, it makes it easy for an anti-gun licensing body (like in New Jersey) to arbitrarily keep people from getting guns. The NJ State Police has a history of this, for instance.

My standard response to anyone stating this is replacing 2nd amendment with first amendment.

"I do not think the government should cut off the right freedom of religion. My position for many years has been that just as a motorist must have a license, a preacher should be required to have one as well. Anyone wanting to preach should have to pass a written exam that shows that they are moral, , that they’re intelligent enough and responsible enough to preach."

That's scary, isn't it? IT's just as scary to those of us that take our 2a rights serously.

Wow... Well said. I couldn't agree more. Just for the record, I am in the second voting category. Don't think it was me that said "I agree". In fact, I was 100% behind Rudy until I read about this.

[Xander]

Sure, he's a personable guy...I might even have a beer with him...But I wouldn't vote for him...That simple...

He used to run the Soviet Socialist Republic of NYC. 'Nuff said.

EDIT: Someday I'm going to grow a brain, and figure out how to get this stupid post edited properly.

[Liberty]

Sure, he's a personable guy...I might even have a beer with him...But I wouldn't vote for him...That simple...

He used to run the Soviet Socialist Republic of NYC. 'Nuff said.

EDIT: Someday I'm going to grow a brain, and figure out how to get this stupid post edited properly.

Before we get wrapped up where he is from, our best practical option just may be the ex governor from the peoples commonwealth of Massachusetts. We might like Ron Paul,the Newt , or Fred but they don't realistically stand a chance

It doesn't really matter, my vote will go to anyone but Hillary. Even if its Rudy.

[wo5m]

I don't think it would work. As others have said the more your restrict guns the more criminal get them illegally just like drugs.

However, it only people licenses are allowed to buy guns, then we should have over-the-counter gun sales for people with licenses. No additional background checks, No waiting periods, no additional paper work. Somehow I don't see it happening.

[stevie_d_64]

Sure, he's a personable guy...I might even have a beer with him...But I wouldn't vote for him...That simple...

He used to run the Soviet Socialist Republic of NYC. 'Nuff said.

EDIT: Someday I'm going to grow a brain, and figure out how to get this stupid post edited properly.

Before we get wrapped up where he is from, our best practical option just may be the ex governor from the peoples commonwealth of Massachusetts. We might like Ron Paul,the Newt , or Fred but they don't realistically stand a chance

It doesn't really matter, my vote will go to anyone but Hillary. Even if its Rudy.

Since you're talking about Mitt...He's had an uphill battle as an elected official from day one...

He only had about 6 Republican Senators in Massachusetts and a handfull of State Reps to help him compramise his "conservative agenda" in that state...It was a very watered down agenda...Was that his fault, absolutely not...

Mitt Romney is another neat guy running for the top job...His wife is a charmer...But matching him up against the opposition, I just don't see him getting a fair shake when the rubber hits the road...I belive he's solid on our issue, but to me he would use the RKBA as a barganing tool, and I just can't support that...