In the wake of Monday’s horrific events, each candidate issued statements expressing prayers and then, surely, got to work figuring out what this means for their campaigns, our nation, our laws, and ourselves. As quoted at, Giuliani now asserts that “this tragedy does not alter the second amendment.”

This is in line with other statements he’s made recently. From a New York Times article,

‘There are people on both sides of the gun control issue who say Mr. Giuliani has changed positions, not just language, on an issue of vital importance to many voters. The most important example, they say, is that as mayor he advocated national standards, while recently he has said that gun control issues should be decided by state and local governments.

“There can be reasonable restrictions, and they largely should be done by state and by — and then, you know, done by legislatures,” he said at a news conference on March 12 in Washington.

People on both sides of the issue say that represents a shift.

Mr. Giuliani’s aides say his basic view — allowing reasonable limits on gun ownership — has been consistent over the years.’

At least they admit that he does advocate some “reasonable limits,” as he has since his 1980s days as a Justice Department official supporting mandatory waiting periods and a ban on armor-piercing bullets. Perhaps the biggest flip-flop in Giuliani’s gun views, though, is his retreat from advocating national gun policies such as the Federal ban on assault weapons or national standards for gun licensing, both of which he extensively advocated in the 1990s.

So Giuliani has moved from major gun control advocate to cautious 2nd amendment devotee — though, to be fair, his campaign does claim that the national standards he advocated were meant as guidelines rather than strict regulations. The New York Times does not seem convinced, however.