House Democrats could revoke allowing lawmakers to have guns on Capitol grounds

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • bibitor

    Kulak
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 10, 2017
    1,894
    FEMA Region III
    I'm actually in favor of this. We should also take away their armed guards. That way they can live their shallow, meaningless lives the same way the rest of us do. When they need help, just dial 911 and wait...just like the rest of us.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    33,862
    "... Citing the politically-motivated 2017 shooting attack on Republican lawmakers and their staff – which left Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., seriously wounded – Huffman told the newspaper he has concerns someone would be able to gain access to a firearm legally kept in the Capitol and use it for a nefarious act...."

    Uh, sure, Mr. Huffman. A perfect analogy. This rule would have prevented the Scalise shooting. The gun came from a House member's office, and was there legally. Er, Not. In fact, none of that is true. Other than that, Huffman, it's a brilliant idea and argument. You should run for Congress. Oh, wait.

    The Left gets away with its patently moronic, emotional appeals because the country has been trained, educated, and incentivized to respond to emotion instead of rational thought and discourse. And the Congress is now infested with it. What does Ocasio-Cortez have to say about it? :sarcasm:
     

    TheOriginalMexicanBob

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 2, 2017
    32,178
    Sun City West, AZ
    All a member of Congress has to do is go to the Federal Courthouse and have a judge deputize them as a Deputy Marshal and be able to carry concealed after that. I don't know how many have done that but it has been done in the past. US Marshals have nationwide jurisdiction and can carry anywhere. Maybe some judges won't do it...some probably will.

    If their last name is Kennedy (the Massachusetts Kennedys) they have their own private security detail carrying handguns and submachine guns wherever they go.
     

    Glaron

    Camp pureblood 13R
    BANNED!!!
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 20, 2013
    12,752
    Virginia
    I figured something will go. Next Bernie Sanders shooter.

    Where are the Republicans? I wanna shoot a few ideas...
     

    GolfR

    Ultimate Member
    Oct 20, 2016
    1,324
    Columbia MD
    Why not disarm capital police and the secret service while they are at it? Let the lawmakers live by the same restrictions that we do.
     

    motorcoachdoug

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    All a member of Congress has to do is go to the Federal Courthouse and have a judge deputize them as a Deputy Marshal and be able to carry concealed after that. I don't know how many have done that but it has been done in the past. US Marshals have nationwide jurisdiction and can carry anywhere. Maybe some judges won't do it...some probably will.

    If their last name is Kennedy (the Massachusetts Kennedys) they have their own private security detail carrying handguns and submachine guns wherever they go.

    Believe it or not, that idea has already been brought up after the shootings at the ballfield. A US Senator had written the DOJ asking about that, and the DOJ replied it would be a no go due to the face they would not be trained and if they saw a crime committed in front of them when they are home or anywhere else besides the US Capitol they would duty bound to arrest that person,charge them, and go thru the whole justice system. Also since they were not trained by any law enforcement academy they would have to attend FLETC in Glenco,GA.
     

    TexDefender

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 28, 2017
    1,572
    I'm actually in favor of this. We should also take away their armed guards. That way they can live their shallow, meaningless lives the same way the rest of us do. When they need help, just dial 911 and wait...just like the rest of us.

    Though you may think is is a good idea, I don't. They are not going to get rid of the fences, the metal detectors, or the uniformed officers. The reason why the progressive democrats want to remove it, is so that can say seen no one needs guns. That is really what this is about. Hot areas, were mass shoots occur are the places that you can't carry. If you use public transportation, you can't carry. To let the progressives win this, is at minimum a crack in the wall.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,925
    Messages
    7,259,308
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom