myspace views counter
Search

Search Talk Radio News Service:

Latest Photos
@PoliticalBrief
Search
Search Talk Radio News Service:
Latest Photos
@PoliticalBrief
« Former labor secretary challenges Bush on black families | Main | DoD: The U.S. does not seek a new Cold War »
Tuesday
Sep092008

DC police say looser guns laws would make their jobs harder

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.

Reader Comments (7)

Get real, Cathy. Terrorists who want to take out a dignitary motorcade are not going to be deterred by a law against guns.

Can you imagine how stupid Cathy must think we are? Picture one terrorist saying to another "You can't kill them with a semi-automatic, because they are illegal in DC".

September 9, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterGet real, Cathy

Please, you mean they may actually have to work a little, lol.

Just think, all the crimes they are doing nothing about now may actually become smaller, then they won't be able to say they need all that money they get to do nothing. The above poster got it right, criminals don't give to shakes about whether it is legal or not, that is why they are criminals - DUH!

They are just pissed they are having to give up a little bit of that control they so desperately love. We the People, have the power Cathy and the rest of you power-mad politicians, not you the politicians.

I say it is time to take back more of our Constitutional rights, by force if we have to!

September 10, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterDuh, we're all dumb amerikans

I see they rounded up all the usual sycophants, in order that they all 'sing in unison.'

The remark:
"All espoused the same view: guns are dangerous and would make their work harder."

Harder than what?

Than now? What about all the other city cops everyplace else?

And then there's this little gem:
—————
"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."
—————
What the hell has >SHE< been smoking?

Are we suppose to believe that D.C.'s gun laws have ~stopped~ such a thing from happening in the past?!?!?!

WHAT'S MORE: If that ragged scenario above were to happen, it WOULD happen all with —or without— the gun-control laws they now have.

And —MORE IMPORTANTLY— is this: She is equating the law-abiding citizens of the city to criminals in waiting.

I guess it's true what's said about most public officials: Liars, cheats, thieves and murderers.

September 10, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterHighlander

As a Jewess in the US, may I remind everyone that America wasn't won with a registered gun? And that criminals are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk? That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!!

September 10, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterWendy Weinbaum

I work for a school district in an alternative school. I know my job would be easier if we could suspend our students 1st and 4th amendment rights. The district does not have that luxury. Washington D. C. should not have that kind of luxury regarding the 2nd amendment. The cops in D. C. need to learn to do their jobs the way cops in other big cities do.

September 10, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterMark B

"Suppose you were an idiot. Or suppose you were a Congressman. But I repeat myself."

September 12, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterMark Twain

The depositions taken at this 'hearing' were scripted by the Brady Campaign. They all used the exact same talking points that were contained in a truly ridiculous presser sent out by Paul Helmke claiming that children would be walking around w/ machineguns and armed vehicles would be prowling the streets.

http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2008/09/fearmongering-beyond-wapo.html

http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2008/09/brady-campaign-talking-points.html

September 13, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterthirdpower

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>