SENATOR HUTCHISON INTRODUCES LEGISLATION TO LIFT D.C. GUN BAN

Senator Hutchinson Web Site ^ | 3/28/07

[LdSentinal]

Bill restores constitutional rights to Washington, D.C. residents

WASHINGTON, DC -- Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) introduced the District of Columbia Personal Protection Act of 2007, a bill to restore Second Amendment rights in Washington, D.C.

“The constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens do not end when they cross into the borders of the District of Columbia,” said Sen. Hutchison.

“The gun ban has been proven ineffective by the trend of increased violent crime in the District. The citizens of Washington, D.C., deserve to have the same right to defend themselves and their families in their homes that lawful Americans enjoy.

“This requires both a legislative and judicial remedy. I hope the Parker case goes before the Supreme Court and that the court asserts that the right to bear arms is an individual, and not a collective, right as the D.C. Circuit and Fifth Circuit Courts have affirmed.”

The District of Columbia enacted the Firearms and Control Regulations Act in 1976 that banned handguns and required rifles and shotguns to be registered and stored unloaded and either locked or disassembled, giving it the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. Prior to the gun ban’s implementation, the murder rate in the District was on the decline. Following the ban, the murder rate began to rise while violent crime was decreasing nationally. According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, in 2005, the most recent year from which statistics are available, the District of Columbia led the nation in violent crime.

[chesty_puller]

And this is our female Senator. God knows I love Texas!

[LdSentinal]

Me thinks Kay is angling for the VP spot.

[chesty_puller]

Could be.

[AZRepublican]

There is no rights under the second amendment.

[basil]

Whatever she is doing, she's right on this! PS--hi chesty!

[Alter Kaker]

Since this will be referred to Senator Akaka's Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Subcomittee of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee for further consideration, what do you think the odds are of Senator Akaka ever allowing this to come up for a vote?

0%?

FYI, Kay Bailey Hutchison introduces this every Congress, and every Congress (hitherto under Republican control) it has gone nowhere.

[LiberalBassTurds]

“This requires both a legislative and judicial remedy. I hope the Parker case goes before the Supreme Court and that the court asserts that the right to bear arms is an individual, and not a collective, right as the D.C. Circuit and Fifth Circuit Courts have affirmed.”

She's an idiot. By doing this the case will never reach the Supreme Court.

LBT
-=-=-

[Neu Pragmatist]

So do you think it's going to go somewhere under a Dim controlled congess ?

[Neu Pragmatist]

That might be a good thing until we get at least one more Conservative Contructionist on the SCOTUS . The way it is made up now , i'm not sure I want them to hear a landmark Second Amendment case just yet .

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

She has even mentioned it at length.

Picking her for VP would be a no-brainer. She's a solid conservative Republican.

[Nick Danger]

This is one of those weird cases where Things Are Not As They Seem. What was won in the DC Circuit is one of the clearest decisions ever made on this subject, and it unambiguously states that the Constitution says that citizens have an individual right to bear arms, and for the purpose of personal defense. In other words, no nonsense about "restricted to well regulated militias" and no hoo-hah about "only for hunting," etc.

From the gun-grabbers' point of view, the absolutely worst thing that could happen next is that the case gets appealed to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court upholds the DC Circuit. If that happens, gun control goes out the window on a nationwide basis. This, of course, is exactly what the Plaintiffs want to see happen.

The liberals don't want that. So you may see big-time gun grabbers like Diane Feinstein pushing bills to repeal the DC gun ban. The goal is not to grant any freedom to the citizens of DC (they already have it, thanks to the court ruling). What the liberals want is to render the case 'moot' before the Supreme Court could get a chance to rule on it and make it The Law Of The Land.

Remember when The Constitution was the law of the land? Well, it still is. But every once in a while the courts have to rap the liberals upside the head to remind them.

[Redbob]

Somebody must have scripted this for her; she hasn't the mental capacity to do this on her own.

[Redbob]

Keep in mind KAy Bailey was a staunch supporter of the McCain-Feingold restrictions on free speech - the Constitution doesn't mean bean-dip to her.

[Redbob]

"So you may see big-time gun grabbers like Diane Feinstein pushing bills to repeal the DC gun ban. The goal is not to grant any freedom..."

You've hit right at the heart of this point!

Kay Bailey is either an unwitting tool of Feinswine et al, or she is in cahoots with the other members of the Menopause Caucus.

From what I've seen of her over the past years, "unwitting tool" fits better - sad to say.

[Alter Kaker]

Since it went nowhere every time it was introduced previously, in Republican congresses, I fail to see how this has a snowball's chance in hell in a Democratic congress.

[jackibutterfly]

I don't get it - I thought this was done already, lifting the ban, I mean.

[ustanker]

Eleanor Holmes is screaming her lungs out! Keep the guns out of D.C. only criminals can have them.

[Popocatapetl]

If Washingtonians are permitted to defend, and there is a substantial drop in the crime rate, that fact should be trumpeted around the world, especially in places like London and Australia.

For too long they have used the lie that gun confiscation makes people safer. They need to have their noses rubbed in the truth. Not that it will matter, the REAL reasons for those gun confiscations had nothing to do with protecting the public, and everything to do with protecting government power.

[supercat]

From the gun-grabbers' point of view, the absolutely worst thing that could happen next is that the case gets appealed to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court upholds the DC Circuit. If that happens, gun control goes out the window on a nationwide basis. This, of course, is exactly what the Plaintiffs want to see happen.

My worry with the Court is that they may decide that while Second Amendment protects an individual right, the government is allowed to place so many "reasonable restrictions" as to render it worthless.