Comments on: Guns in DC

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 02:14:05 +0000

Damn, I just got done sending hate mail to my new Senator Kay Hagan for knowingly voting for an unconstitutional bill. I should have thanked her instead, figuring that the blatantly unconstitutional part granting DC a new Rep will almost certainly be struck down, while the good part likely won’t be.

By: MarkD

MarkD — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 21:20:06 +0000

What Captain Holly said, especially since this vote for DC is clearly unconstitutional. If they want a vote, make them part of Maryland, subject to its laws and count them in the 2010 census.

By: Captain Holly

Captain Holly — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:29:14 +0000

In response to anon, it will be more interesting if these two provisions killing DC’s gun laws and the Fairness Doctrine will act as a “poison pill”, since the House’s version has neither.

I can’t believe the Dems would allow DC’s gun laws to be overturned just to get an extra vote in Congress, but then again these are Democrats.

By: Harold

Harold — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:03:09 +0000

RAH: No, she voted against the amendment to add this to the bill, see the offical roll call.

By: ParatrooperJJ

ParatrooperJJ — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 13:38:59 +0000

You are giving a New York Democrat too much credit.

By: RAH

RAH — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:35:16 +0000

Maybe she was against this bill because she disagreed giviing unconstitutional voting rights and not because of the gun rights provision. There are a lot of reasons to vote aginst this bill that have nothing to do with the rider on DC gun rights

By: Pink Pig

Pink Pig — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 07:23:18 +0000

It’s fairly hard to maintain the position that Congress has no authority over DC, but that nevertheless DC is not entitled to representation. Given the choice, I would support the idea that Congress holds jurisdiction over DC, and therefore DC is not entitled to representation. If that means that Congress can go crazy experimenting with DC, well, so be it. The conservatives lost the election, so they have no valid complaint. There’s always another election just down the road. You guys need to learn to give the enemy the rope to hang itself with, otherwise you’ll have no ammunition for the next campaign.

By: man_in_tx

man_in_tx — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 04:07:28 +0000

It cannot be said enough: Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment! This will put another layer of checks and balances between the yo-yos in the Senate and Soros and their other keepers.

By: Rick C

Rick C — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 03:25:16 +0000

ben,

I’d guess she started thinking about getting re-elected in New York.

By: ic

ic — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:54:21 +0000

We are all socialists ruled by fascists who take away our guns.

By: ka

ka — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:48:37 +0000

“…since they are ruled by Marxist thugs.”

Didn’t you hear, we’re all socialists now.

By: Chas

Chas — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:28:48 +0000

It�s perfectly understandable that good people in our nation�s capital continue to be harassed as they try to defend themselves and their loved ones in their own homes, since they are ruled by Marxist thugs.

By: ben

ben — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:01:47 +0000

What’s the deal with “Gillibrand voted against” Does anyone have more information or a statement?

I thought she supported 2nd Amendment rights.

By: anon

anon — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:11:49 +0000

Giving DC representation _legally_ requires an amendment to the Constitution, hence this bill is pretty sure to fail a court challenge (but with the SCOTUS you never know). If the bill is overturned, what happens to the rider?