Ammo For Sale

« « Empowering Women | Home | Future of anti-gun arguments » »

An argument against DC statehood

If all their reps are this stupid:

“When you look at all of the amendments, six other amendments, the word ‘people’ is used, it is referring collectively, usually to the states.”

— D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton to Pacifica Radio’s “Democracy Now!”

18 Responses to “An argument against DC statehood”

  1. Rustmeister Says:

    Well, it does come from the place that thought banning handguns was Constitutional.

  2. Sebastian-PGP Says:

    Ah, the Final Call. Now there’s a paper that puts a premium on fair, accurate reporting.

  3. DirtCrashr Says:

    Eleanor Holmes Norton – not even close to the sharpest – in fact if she was a stick you couldn’t put your eye out, and the bludgeoning would be rubbery.

  4. Jeff Says:

    My old boss had a saying for people that dumb: “Dumber than a bag full of hair”

  5. Oldsmoblogger Says:

    And I bet the Democracy Now! cranks ate it up, too. It fits their grand project to a tee.

  6. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    Well, if only the states have the right to peacably assemble than I say we start by arresting all the D.C. politicians at their next meeting. And the next time they don’t like what the .gov does, tell them to piss off: Only states can petition the gov’t for redress of grievances.

    But it would explain why the feds can raid our houses but not Congressman what’s-his-face with the freezer full of cash.

  7. Ron W Says:

    And IF the RKBA is a “collective right” of “free States” then they have control of the militia and the States control the guns and the armed citizenry.The Federal Gov’t must ASK FOR PERMISSION to call them into its service (Article I, Section 7.15-16) And the FREE States decide who is the militia….here in Tennessee, according to our State Constitution, the people have a right to keep and CARRY arms for self-defense (Article I, Section 26)….so WE ARE THE MILITIA!!

  8. kaveman Says:

    I always knew Norton was a crusty douche nozzle, but to now have it in writing is just oh so precious.

  9. Justthisguy Says:

    Umm, give it back to Maryland? I mean, there was Maryland before there was a District of Columbia.

    Hell, there was Maryland before there were United States of America.

  10. Nate Says:

    I have a question. Since Heller mentions DC specifically, if DC was made a real big boy state, would we have automatic Incorporation?

  11. Xrlq Says:

    No.

  12. A.W. Says:

    On the serious end of it, I would say that if we wanted to give DC residents equal representation, we should exactly what we did on the Virginia side of the “diamond” all those years ago: reabsorb them back into their original state, MD. Make it Washington, MD, rather than adding a star to the flag.

    I am not a Marylander saying that, either. But if they want equal represention, that is how to do it.

    But we shouldn’t. There needs to be one spot on this earth reserved for the complete dominion of the federal government. DC is it. And if you don’t like it, quit yer whining and leave. Seriously, DC is 10 miles by 10 miles, how hard is it to move away and still keep your job? Even with DC’s traffic a 10 mile commute is nothing.

  13. xj Says:

    I’m sure you all remember how the Fourth Amendment guarantees the right of the states to be secure from unreasonable searches of their houses, or

  14. LarryD Says:

    The District of Columbia was originally formed from land contributed by Maryland and Virgina, West Virgina has had it’s territory returned.

    The District could be shrunk quite a bit, returning all the residential areas to Maryland, which would gut the DC-Statehood arguments. I’m in favor.

    Time to make it a general movement, I’ll bet the DC-Statehood activists would shut up in a hurry.

  15. Chad Says:

    “Umm, give it back to Maryland? I mean, there was Maryland before there was a District of Columbia.” – Justthisguy

    Why would anyone want to do something so mean to the state of Maryland?

    But seriously, until Puerto Rico is admitted there’s no business talking about DC as a state.

  16. RAH Says:

    Please do not give DC to MD. We have enough of DC crime in PG county. We have a Democratic lock in this state. We will never get any conservative positions passed if we got DC. Do not be this mean.

    Beside DC home rule has been a failure from the start. Better to to have Congress run the city . That is when it had low crime and good schools. My parents used to talk how nice DC was back in the 50’s.

    DC is talking about a street train which is amusing since they ripped up all the rails from the old street trains

  17. Porphyrogenitus Says:

    Why foist it on Maryland? Though it’d be much better than making DC a State in its own right. Especially since Maryland already has a tradition of electing the most ignorant people in the State.

    But we could give it back to Great Britain – D.C. was part of Great Britain before there was a U.S.

    If the D.C.ers want handgun bans, an EU-style Regulation Raj, and an NHS-style health service, let ’em have it. Off to Britain with them. The concept of individual liberty enshrined in the Declaration of Independence & Bill of Rights is obviously completely alien to the likes of D.C.s representatives.

  18. Xrlq Says:

    Here’s a solution everyone can hate equally. Keep the city council around but limit its powers to those of a typical non-home rule city elsewhere in the country, with Congress directly assuming directly all functions that would normally be handled by a state. Then give DC back to Maryland for purposes of federal elections and Congressional districting only. That way, Maryland’s Senators would represent both Maryland and DC, and DC would pick up a Congressional seat or two that could also straddle the state line. No more “taxation without representation,” and more importantly, no new Senators from a city that has no business being a state.