Posted on 04/16/2010 4:14:03 AM PDT by Second Amendment First
Cravenness and horse trading are too often the political reality in Washington, but a deal now in the works is particularly cruel.
Congress is poised, finally, to give the tax-paying citizens of the District of Columbia what they have been so long and so unfairly denied: a representative with the power to vote. But the gun lobby has extracted too high a price: the scuttling of vital local gun controls intended to keep the capital city’s residents safe.
*
The legislation would intrude on home-rule prerogatives by repealing the district’s restrictions on semiautomatic weapons, rolling back requirements for registering most guns and even dropping existing criminal penalties for owners of unregistered firearms.
House Democratic leaders previously opposed gun control attachments, but they, too, seem ready to accept the measure, inserted in the Senate’s version of the D.C. voting bill by John Ensign, a Republican of Nevada.
As usual, bipartisan majorities stand by to do the gun lobby’s bidding. It has already been endorsed by the Democratic majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada. It is a cynical, sickening compromise.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
For once I agree with The New York Times -- This deal stinks! Down with compromise! Stick to your guns, liberal diehards, and ... and ... and die hard!
Kill the bill! Kill the bill! Kill the bill!
I've caught Eleanor Holmes Norton's act on PBS --she's one of those black women like Mary Berry that you can't talk to; you were born wrong and you're still wrong, and why are you still here talking?
Like that.
Unconstitutional on its face. It'll get knocked down 9-0.
That’s a really really bad deal.
Good God.
The people in socialist and communist countries have more personal freedoms than some here in the U.S.
Absolutely 180 degrees opposite of what should be required by the rule of law.
Very well stated. Thanks.
Referring to the Washington, D.C. gun ban that is still in effect, “But the gun lobby has extracted too high a price: the scuttling of vital local gun controls intended to keep the capital city’s residents safe.”
These people really are this stupid. They should be barred from the first amendment, too. They’re not normal human beings. The laws don’t apply to them, other than to ensure that the padded cells smell nice and the restraints are soft leather.
Congress has no power to do this. It would require a constitutional amendment. Congress can't "give" voting representatives to Guam, Monaco or Moon Base Alpha either.
Do any of the libtards at the NYT ever read the Constitution?
GMTA
I am taking off on the trip to DC in a couple of hours.
The Constitution means nothing to either congress or the NYTimes except when they want to make up some new “right” and call it “constitutional”.
The New York Times talking about Washington DC. NYC and DC have the strictest gun control and have among the highest crime rates in the US.
They just don't get it.
Are you doing the DC or VA rally?
I'm sorry. Come home to gun-friendly AZ safely!
Maybe by the time you get back, the Governatrix will have decided whether she wants to sign ConCarry or not!
She has until Saturday evening to veto it. If she simply lets it become law, that is fine by me. Some stupid “Conservatives” on a KFYI in Phoenix are attempting to get her to veto the bill. I believe Barry Young is one of them.
I hope to attend both.
Yep, and Michelle, and Barry Markson, when he was sitting in for Young a couple weeks ago, and Broomhead (from what I hear).
I called in to challenge some of their fallacious "reasoning", and got nothing but a busy signal for over an hour. Probably dialed a hundred times that hour. Then during the hour when I was calling, they said they were going to start accepting calls, but I think they may have had the "calls" prearranged because I STILL never got anything but a busy signal. And then they act surprised when caller after caller agreed or mostly agreed with their position. I think it was a setup. Not that it would have mattered anyway. Any time I've ever got to "talk" to him, Young starts talking over the top of you while you're still making your point, and "debunks" something you never said in the first place. He's kind of a putz.
The whole thing is so monolithic and unreasonable on the merits, and they're so averse to allowing supporters to have a say (sound like liberals, huh?), that I think there's some behind-the-scenes manipulating going on. Maybe Brewer doesn't want to sign it and she's trying to win over KFYI's conservative listeners or set them up to use as an excuse for vetoing it.
Weird, though, because she's signed ever other pro-rights bill she's seen, so maybe she's just been busy, or maybe she wants to duck it and just let it become law without her signature.
WHAT!?
BLATANTLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Article I, Section 2: "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every secondYear by the People of the several States"
Is D.C. a STATE? NO.
Congress does not have this power. If it arrogates such a power to D.C., it is illegitimate on its face, and ANY vote in which Norton casts the deciding vote is illegitimate, NULL and VOID.
If Congress does this, to what remedy will we resort? The ballot box? Meaningless. If Congress can vote itself more votes, it can do anything, including overturning elections. I fear for my country, and for the civil war to come.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.