Should Members Of Congress Carry Guns?
BY Herschel Smith
7 years, 4 months ago
As Bloomberg News reported Thursday morning, some Republican members of Congress responded to these events by proposing that lawmakers carry their own guns for protection. Representative Dave Brat of Virginia told reporters that Congress should consider allowing members to arm themselves for the sake of safety. At present, firearms and other dangerous weapons (except those carried by law enforcement) are prohibited on the U.S. Capitol grounds.
Representative Chris Collins, a New York Republican, said he now intends to carry a firearm at public events, according to television station WKBW. “I can assure you, from this day forward: I have a carry permit. I will be carrying when I’m out and about,” Collins said. “It’s going to be in my pocket from this day forward.”
Sorry Chris, you can’t, unless the D.C. police grant you a dispensation because you’re more special than other people. Go back to New York and solve your own damn problems. Your state has some of the most restrictive firearms laws on earth, just short of Hawaii and South Africa. Don’t come crying to me until you fix your state’s problems.
Dave, instead of arguing for Congressional members being armed, why don’t you give us a national carry law? Oh, I see. Because you can’t get that passed, but the congresscritters will arm themselves for their own protection. Got it.
On June 17, 2017 at 7:54 am, Al Reasin said:
There is a bill in the House and Senate for a national carry law that would even be reciprocal for non-resident holders. In MD, NY, NJ and some other states it is difficult to obtain a CCW permit to carry under (unconventional) laws. Under both bills, if one had a Florida non-resident permit, those states would have to allow you to legally carry.
The Founders said that the 9th Amendment covers those rights not enumerated in the Constitution such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; natural rights. Self defense is a natural right and combined with 2nd Amendment and the incorporation of the 2nd by the SCOTUS per the 14th Amendment, restrictive laws should be null and void.
Unfortunately the SCOTUS did not define the right in terms that prevents states and locals from passing laws/regulations to make it difficult to obtain a CCW permit. All states should be shall states, period. Restrictions should only be based on criminality, mental defect and age, We need a test case to force this issue to be addressed.
On June 17, 2017 at 8:03 am, Al Reasin said:
Oh, I should add that most don’t understand that under the rule of law even obviously unconstitutional laws/regulations, like President Adams’ Alien and Sedition Acts and Wilson’s Sedition Act, are constitutional and can be enforced until the judiciary declares them unconstitutional or they sunset as those did or are revoked. Thus it is very important who we put in office and on the bench. They do not teach this in school/college and I have tried to alert people about this for years as a speaker at TEA Party rallies, but I certainly have not had a large enough bully pulpit. Those that do seldom mention this reality.