Giuliani: Blind Should Be Able to Carry Guns

Discussion in 'In the News' started by VolGrad, Oct 25, 2007.

  1. VolGrad

    VolGrad Tactical Statistician

    I have read something about his "new" views on 2a and can't remember if it was on this board or not. Here is an interesting article. He is still a d!#k IMO. I think he is saying whatever he has to say to get votes.

     
  2. budder

    budder Moderator Staff Member

    I forgot where the Constitution said that natural rights don't apply to those three categories. It's probably one of the first lines, but I just can't find it. :(
     

  3. Sharky

    Sharky Active Member

    4,981
    0
    36
    Age requirement????? Hmm to carry I believe so. But I have seen a few Younger people handle guns better than trained so called professionals!
     
  4. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    27,478
    657
    113
    agree

    I agree with Rudy. But IF powers greater than myself mandate a hands-on shooting test to "qualify" for a carry permit, I would say that there should be special consideration made for people whose physical disabilities prevent them from doing accurate shooting. For a blind person, there ought to be a much lower standard for hitting the target, although it woudn't be unreasonable for that citizen to have to have additional training to show that he's aware of his limitations and the special tactical problems he'll face in a deadly force encounter. It might not be unreasonable for him to be limited in caliber and ammo selection, since it's much more likely he'll miss center-of-mass and therefore overpenetration would be a major concern. Glaser safety slugs would make so much more sense than standard-weight FMJ rounds.
     
  5. Thorsen

    Thorsen New Member

    4,226
    0
    0
    Guiliani is simply trying to "soften" his more liberal positions to appear more palatable to the right wing element of the republican party. If he garners the republican nomination, I fully expect him to extend an invitation to Mike Huckabee at the convention to be his vice-president, and I expect Huckabee to accept. Any other action would divide the republican party and assure a win in the general election by Clinton.
     
  6. merlock

    merlock Active Member

    2,515
    0
    36
    Rudy can soften all he wants; I'll still *never* vote for him.
     
  7. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,050
    1,427
    113
    I agree with him, I just don't believe him.
     
  8. Thorsen

    Thorsen New Member

    4,226
    0
    0
    Ditto. I also think it is telling that in this article he comes across as a relatively strong supporter of the second amendment, whereas he was just recently stating that he saw no problem with a large city such as New York having strict gun control legislation in place.

    One of these is not like the other, and old Rudy is simply showing his stripes as a politician .... say what they want to hear and then do what you want to do.
     
  9. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,050
    1,427
    113
    Imagine if a politician came out in favor of a different First Amendment depending upon where you live. Or a different Fourth Amendment.

    :roll:
     
  10. moonchicken

    moonchicken New Member

    1,367
    0
    0
    I agree with what someone else said before on another post: Guiliani is riding on the publicity from 9/11 to get support for his nomination. And I don't think he's being sincere regarding his "change of heart" towards keeping and bearing arms, it's just another politician's tactic to get more votes. But I think it's a certainty that whoever wins the Republican candidacy (Rudy seems to be ahead so far) will be going against Hillary....and that is a choice I'm reluctantly preparing myself mentally for: vote for Guiliani or not vote at all. :?
     
  11. cripple

    cripple New Member

    437
    0
    0
    THIS SHOULD SPEAK FOR ITSELF...

    [​IMG]
     
  12. viper32cm

    viper32cm New Member

    760
    0
    0
    He's only half right. If someone repealed the 2nd it wouldn't mean sh!t because the constitution granted no new rights it merely recognized preexisting rights which exist because we are free people, not subjects.
     
  13. oldguns

    oldguns New Member

    294
    0
    0
    I remember Rudy saying in one of the recent debates that the Constitution "grants" you the right to bear arms. Tells me all I need to know about his political philosophy.

    Years ago I remember a story about a blind person who carried a .44 magnum loaded with blanks. :shock:
     
  14. wsweeks2

    wsweeks2 New Member

    6,306
    0
    0
    Scary!!!