Rudy just doesn't get it sometimes. According to this article, he "addressed a potentially troublesome issue with conservative voters" in California recently. He didn't address it very well. He claims to "understand the Second Amendment," while pointing out that his gun control policies had no effect on hunting. Last I checked, the amendment in question mentioned nothing about hunting. He can't claim to "understand the right to bear arms" if he thinks it's about hunting.
He also claimed his gun control helped reduce crime in NYC, which is supposed to be justification enough. Taking away freedom of the press might reduce libel, but you never hear that discussed. The right to bear arms is not contingent upon crime rates. Even if gun control actually reduced crime, taking away the God-given right to self-preservation is not justified. Humans have the right to defend themselves from crime and tyranny using the best modern tools available.
Rudy, are you the tyrant who would take away that right? You don't have my vote.