It doesn't look promising for H.R. 6691.

[Rugerlvr]

They've rounded up the usual suspects to denounce the bill in front of committee...

http://talkradionews.com/2008/09/dc-police-say-looser-guns-laws-would-make-their-jobs-harder/

DC police say looser guns laws would make their jobs harder
Jay Tamboli

The House Oversight and Government Reform committee held a very one-sided hearing today on H.R. 6691, the Second Amendment Enforcement Act. Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) described the bill as a “wholesale evisceration” of DC’s gun laws it would allow “military-style rifles” to be carried on the streets of Washington, DC. He repeatedly referred to the bill as “the NRA bill.” Other Democrats, including DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, also criticized the bill for imposing changes on DC rather than allowing the DC city council to come up with its own solution. Republicans, including Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) criticized the partisanship of the hearing and said it served no purpose.

The witnesses at the hearing were DC Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier, US Capitol Police Chief Phillip Morse, US Park Police Deputy Chief Kevin Hay, and Washington Nationals Park Director of Securrity Robert Campbell. All espoused the same view: guns are dangerous and would make their work harder. In questioning, Chief Lanier went into some detail about the special considerations ensuring security in Washington, DC. She pointed out that no other city has the number of dignitaries and sensitive areas that Washington has. While other cities can shut down major streets for motorcades, the number of motorcades in DC makes such blockages impossible without seriously disrupting city life. She described a common motorcade attack plan, in which small arms are used to take out security personnel, bringing the motorcade to a stop, after which explosives can be used against the car carrying the VIP. Loosening DC’s gun laws, she implied, would make this attack more likely.

Chief Lanier also pointed out that shotguns had been allowed in DC for home defense before the Supreme Court’s Heller decision, and revolvers are now allowed as well. Tomorrow DC Delegate Norton and Rep. Waxman will introduce a replacement bill in the House.

 

[Bubbles]

Wailing in/by the anti's and media aside, I suspect that Pelosi will do everything in her power to keep this from being brought to the House floor for a vote. I spoke with my rep personally a few weeks ago on another issue, and on guns in passing (she knows me well LOL). She mentioned that as far as she knew, there are no RKBA issues on Congress's radar screen for the rest of the session. I'm guessing that the Democrats don't want to remind gun owners of their stances on the Second Amendment right before the November election.

Good thing Heller II is in the courts.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

You got it -- the last thing they want at this time is to further energize the Sarah Palin supporters.

 

[Rugerlvr]

Loosening DC’s gun laws, she implied, would make this attack more likely.

The woman is clearly insane.

 

[MAKster]

The hearing on the Norton bill was just a side show to placate the D.C. officials. The bill will come to the House floor next week and the pro-2nd bill H.R. 6691 introduced by Rep. Childers will be a substitute amendment. This is expected to pass. The real issue is whether the Senate will consider the bill before the end of the session.

 

[Harvster]

She described a common motorcade attack plan, in which small arms are used to take out security personnel, bringing the motorcade to a stop, after which explosives can be used against the car carrying the VIP. Loosening DC’s gun laws, she implied, would make this attack more likely.

Yup, the only thing stopping folks from attacking motorcades with explosives is the D.C. ban on guns.

 

[Dr.Carbine]

Mental Midgets in Congress!!

Do they really believe that there are people just waiting to ambush dignitaries, and they are only waiting for the gun ban to come down so they can make their hit? How stupid are these congress fools and why are they getting elected?!? If there are people just waiting to kill the dignitaries, wouldn't they be terrorists and criminals and shouldn't law enforcement be after them? It sure would be nice if the arguments on a bill could actually be rational and thoughtful. There I go, dreaming again.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Gee, what happens if someone stages an attack like that and all the citizens start shooting at him?

 

[Smokey Joe]

Time for a quote...

I think Mark Twain said it best: "Suppose you were an idiot. Or suppose you were a Congressman. But I repeat myself."

 

[TwitchALot]

Gee, what happens if someone stages an attack like that and all the citizens start shooting at him?

Obviously, Secret Service Agents wouldn't be able to tell who's the good guy and who's the bad guy, and would begin spray firing from the hip causing massive casualties and blood to run on the streets like a shootout at the OK Corral with MACHINE GUNS. Duh.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Well, you've convinced me. Secret Service Agents shouldn't be allowed to have guns.

 

[armedandsafe]

DC police say looser guns laws would make their jobs harder

I have to agree with this. Once the DC police have to take into consideration that SOME people in DC might be the good guys, they would have to think. They would have to obey the law. They would have to actually do some work.

So long as they can assume that ALL people who live in DC are criminals or criminals-in-waiting, they don't have to worry about whom to pick up and hassle. Life is easy, simple and enjoyable under those rules.

Pops

 

[misANTHrope]

Yup, the only thing stopping folks from attacking motorcades with explosives is the D.C. ban on guns.

It might be worth becoming a Congressman one day just so I could have the chance to question a moron like this.

"So your position is that the folks who would carry out such an atack are currently tabling their plans for fear of violating a gun ban?"

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Careful. You could be charged with assault with a deadly weapon -- using logic on a Liberal.

 

[U.S.SFC_RET]

Vern If you run on a liberal ticket you have to act like one and that means voting..

 

[Stevie-Ray]

She described a common motorcade attack plan, in which small arms are used to take out security personnel, bringing the motorcade to a stop, after which explosives can be used against the car carrying the VIP. Loosening DC’s gun laws, she implied, would make this attack more likely.

Yes, because the people likely to ochestrate this type of attack are clearly going to be the law-abiding citizens of DC, NOT the criminal-types that carry guns regardless of laws. Sheer brilliance. I expect she'll be a bigshot in the Secret Service one day.

 

[NonConformist]

+1 People so easily seem to forget laws only effect the law abiding, criminals dont follow the law!

 

[Duke Junior]

I think Mark Twain said it best: "Suppose you were an idiot. Or suppose you were a Congressman. But I repeat myself."

Yep.Even after 100 years(1835-1910)Mark Twain is incomparable.
Just finished reading The Innocents Abroad for the 2nd time.
The man is an all time comedic,satiric genius.
And, he could handle a revolver!

 

[CU74]

Post #5 by MAKster - The hearing on the Norton bill was just a side show to placate the D.C. officials. The bill will come to the House floor next week and the pro-2nd bill H.R. 6691 introduced by Rep. Childers will be a substitute amendment. This is expected to pass. The real issue is whether the Senate will consider the bill before the end of the session.

Below is an excerpt from a GOA "heads up" to their membership:

"Although the bill is expected to pass in the House, possibly as soon as this week, its fate is less clear in the Senate," reported The Washington Post this past Tuesday. "It has won the backing of 48 [House] Democrats, many facing reelection in strongly pro-gun areas, and is expected to pick up broad support among Republicans."

Remarkably, the Post is right. (A stopped clock is also right twice a day.) The Democrats are trying to "have their cake and eat it too" by protecting
Democrats from rural districts -- allowing them to vote pro-gun -- but then letting the bill die in the Senate.

That's why GOA is encouraging members to contact their two senators at this time.

Sharpen your pencils and write your SenatorWeasels.

 

[Rugerlvr]

My two senators aren't the problem

 

[Zedo]

Heller got a decision from SCOTUS. Congress can't override that. It's a CONSTITUTIONAL issue.

 

[LKB3rd]

Do they really believe that there are people just waiting to ambush dignitaries, and they are only waiting for the gun ban to come down so they can make their hit?

Maybe they do think exactly this. Maybe they know more than we do.
I have said this many times on forums, but I will repeat it here. I think that if you look at this from the angle that their intention is to do what they say they are trying to do (stop gun crime) you are looking at it wrong. I believe the real intention of many in government is to strip power from the citizens, making them totally dependent on government for their basic needs, and to make law abiding citizens unable to use the "means of last resort" to stand up against a government that no longer serves the will and the good of its citizens. Does that sound like any government that we know of?

 

[K-Romulus]

ArmedandSafe has it right:

Most anti-gun-owners I have, err, "discussed" the issue with in the DC area have uniformly (it's scary) raised the argument that "if all guns were banned, then the police could just arrest every person they saw with a gun. Problem solved."

 

[texas bulldog]

Rugerlvr said:
My two senators aren't the problem

neither are mine.

 

[dvcrsn]

Since I live in California--my 2 senators (Fineswine and Barbie Boxer) are part of the problem:banghead::banghead: