Airman193SOS
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2007
- Messages
- 267
Museum shooting stirs gun amendment controversy
OK, let's evaluate this dispassionately, if we can. Surely Misters Mendelson and Brown will do the same upon further reflection.
1) DC v. Heller was about handguns. A handgun was not used here.
2) Longarms have never, to my knowledge, been illegal to possess in the District. They have, however, been illegal to assemble unless a threat is imminent and they have never been legal to carry anywhere in the District loaded, let alone at a National Museum.
3) The weapon was allegedly a .22 LR-chambered rifle, which has never appeared on any "ban" list.
But hey, why not push for another gun ban, only make sure you focus on weapons that were in NO way related to the events at the Holocaust museum?
That, my friends, is a textbook example of the bait-and-switch that legislatures are adept at perpetrating on their constituents. Not that you didn't know that, of course. I trust that I'm surely not insulting any of you with that last bit of commentary. But man, isn't it frustrating when you know what's going to happen and are powerless to do anything about it even as it is happening?
“Today’s event should be a wake-up call for why we must work to fend off the controversial gun amendment that was most recently attached to the DC…Voting Rights Act, and will certainly resurface as part of future legislation,” said D.C. Councilman Michael Brown. “Loosening the District's gun laws is a deadly proposition.”...
...“Congress needs no more evidence than today’s tragedy, which occurred blocks from the White House, for the justification of the District’s strict gun laws, which protect the President, Members of Congress, D.C, residents, and millions of tourists who travel to Washington, DC each year to visit monuments and other sites like the Holocaust Museum,” said D.C. Councilman Phil Mendelson in a statement.
OK, let's evaluate this dispassionately, if we can. Surely Misters Mendelson and Brown will do the same upon further reflection.
1) DC v. Heller was about handguns. A handgun was not used here.
2) Longarms have never, to my knowledge, been illegal to possess in the District. They have, however, been illegal to assemble unless a threat is imminent and they have never been legal to carry anywhere in the District loaded, let alone at a National Museum.
3) The weapon was allegedly a .22 LR-chambered rifle, which has never appeared on any "ban" list.
But hey, why not push for another gun ban, only make sure you focus on weapons that were in NO way related to the events at the Holocaust museum?
That, my friends, is a textbook example of the bait-and-switch that legislatures are adept at perpetrating on their constituents. Not that you didn't know that, of course. I trust that I'm surely not insulting any of you with that last bit of commentary. But man, isn't it frustrating when you know what's going to happen and are powerless to do anything about it even as it is happening?