PDA

View Full Version : D.C.’s AG cites danger to VIPs if Congress axes city’s gun laws


Vtec44
05-19-2009, 4:12 PM
I hope this is not a dupe, I did use the search function. :D

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/DCs-AG-cites-danger-to-VIPs-if-Congress-axes-citys-gun-laws-44678742.html

D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles said presidential and other motorcades will be exposed to high-powered arms fire if the District’s gun laws are stripped out by Congress.

“The proposed Ensign Amendment, which among other things, would prohibit the District of Columbia from enacting legislation on firearms, would have a serious public safety impact for the entire region,” Nickles wrote in a recent letter to D.C.’s nonvoting congressional delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton.

The amendment was added to D.C.’s voting rights bill earlier this year by Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. Voting rights advocates were furious by what they called a “poison pill” amendment aimed at undermining efforts to give the District a vote in the House.

Nickles said the bill jeopardizes the safety of D.C.’s dignitaries.
“Government facilities, dignitaries and public servants are prime targets for terrorists, both foreign and domestic,” Nickles’ letter states.
“But in Washington, D.C., the likelihood of attack is higher and the challenges to protecting the city are greater.”

Last year, Nickles spearheaded D.C.’s failed efforts to defend its restrictive gun laws before the U.S. Supreme Court. In a landmark decision in Heller v. D.C., the court ruled that the Second Amendment not only protects a citizen’s right to bear arms, but to use those arms for self-defense. The decision gutted the District’s gun laws and has jeopardized gun laws in other jurisdictions.

The District revamped its laws, but made the registration process arduous.
Gun rights advocates have vowed to challenge D.C.’s new laws and to continue to bring court challenges until the Supreme Court decides the limits of “reasonable regulation” mentioned but not defined in the Heller case.

Is he for real?

TheBundo
05-19-2009, 4:16 PM
The last politician I can remember being shot in DC was Reagan, then Lincoln (there was a failed attempt on Truman). Reagan was shot by an out-of-towner nut-job, Lincoln by an actor, and the Truman attempt by Puerto Rican Nationalists.

HKDoc
05-19-2009, 4:18 PM
I agree with you.

even if a street thug bothered to get a legal weapon, the last target he would probably go after is a protected dignitary. and with the prices of high powered weapons and ammunition these days, he probably couldn't afford it.

Bend
05-19-2009, 4:21 PM
D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles needs some cheese, a lot of it!

Vtec44
05-19-2009, 4:22 PM
I'm just wondering if Nickles is seriously thinking that ban would really deter assassins if they really want to assassinate VIP's.

RRangel
05-19-2009, 4:23 PM
This shows you what goes through the minds of elitists. They can't very well have free citizens in this country.

The Wingnut
05-19-2009, 4:25 PM
I'm just wondering if Nickles is seriously thinking that ban would really deter assassins if they really want to assassinate VIP's.

Of course not, he's just going after whatever he thinks is going to hold enough water to retain the 2A infringement.

domokun
05-19-2009, 4:48 PM
High power firearms = any long gun with a scope on it... :rolleyes:

7x57
05-19-2009, 4:57 PM
High power firearms = any long gun with a scope on it... :rolleyes:

Nah, it's any firearm that's not been banned yet. We know where this goes--it takes a while to get down to .22LR, but it eventually gets there.

7x57

Jarrod
05-19-2009, 5:02 PM
I'm just wondering if Nickles is seriously thinking that ban would really deter assassins if they really want to assassinate VIP's.

Yeah, I am not convinced that a professional assassin is going to fly into, then hunt around DC for a high power weapon, manage to find one, then try to kill a VIP.

Vtec44
05-19-2009, 5:06 PM
Yeah, I am not convinced that a professional assassin is going to fly into, then hunt around DC for a high power weapon, manage to find one, then try to kill a VIP.

I was thinking more in the line of a professional assassin with his high power rifle heading toward Washington DC. He then realizes that the city has a gun ban, so he changes his plan for it to be compliant with the laws.

DarkHorse
05-19-2009, 5:06 PM
What's wrong with you guys?

Don't you realize that D.C. is the safest city in the USA due its gun laws? At least, it WAS the safest city, until that decision last year. Since then, crime has skyrocketed 100 billion percent, and every politician has been assassinated by criminals that are now allowed to purchase semi-automatic-assault-type AK-16s with heat-seeking incendiary projectiles and RPGs in city limits. Those fiends. If only it were still illegal to commit crimes and assassinate people...

This man should be declared a hero. Not the kind of hero you put on paper money, though. Hmm, maybe we could name some coins after him...

Vectrexer
05-19-2009, 5:26 PM
The story would might make half-sense if there was anybody more important in D.C. that the rest of the citizenry in in D.C.

As for the people that were elected to represent us in Congress (plus leaches that work for them), I consider many to be less important than the people who either live in D.C, or do honest work in D.C.

Apologies to the vampires,,, errr lawyers, that still have running blood and souls who are reading this. ;).

MrClamperSir
05-19-2009, 5:29 PM
I was thinking more in the line of a professional assassin with his high power rifle heading toward Washington DC. He then realizes that the city has a gun ban, so he changes his plan for it to be compliant with the laws.

I'm sure they'd have you believe this scenario is true and they themselves are to be credited for saving VIPs.
I think people like Attorney General Peter Nickles are the reason so many sheeple in this country could care less and don't even bother with politics. Unfortunately it's up to the few citizens like us who have to bear the burden of knowledge and fight the power which seek to destroy us all.

megavolt121
05-19-2009, 5:29 PM
I was thinking more in the line of a professional assassin with his high power rifle heading toward Washington DC. He then realizes that the city has a gun ban, so he changes his plan for it to be compliant with the laws.

More like he'll use his high powered .50 caliber rifle and stand just outside city limits and fire at his target from a mile away as the VIP is moving in a motorcade...

Liberty1
05-19-2009, 5:33 PM
So it's the District of Columbia's Municiple Codes the terrorists fear and that is what is keeping them safe

:rolleyes: :rofl2:

B Strong
05-19-2009, 6:00 PM
And all the important poohbahs he's worried about have professional protection.

fairfaxjim
05-19-2009, 6:03 PM
Those riding in just about any motorcade in DC could easily burry an attempted assasin with BS before he could ever get a shot off. :)

I do truly believe that some of these bozos have heard and repeated this drivel for so long that they are actually starting to believe it. I would challenge them to make two lists, side by side. On the left list, put ALL of the laws that criminals ever break and on the right list, put all of the laws that criminals have never broken. The ones on the left are the ones that don't work - criminals break laws, tha's what makes them criminals - and the ones on the right are the ones we never even needed (Actually about 90% of all of them on those lists were never needed - they just double or triple up on laws we already had.)

DDT
05-19-2009, 6:16 PM
A government that fears the people will never be a threat to the people.

Bizcuits
05-19-2009, 6:26 PM
Why would a terrorist want to kill a politician? They're ****** us more then the terrorists are...

grunz
05-19-2009, 8:08 PM
Good call, we need to bring those gun laws back!

Without DC's strict gun laws you might (conceivably) have two guys go on a sniping rampage around DC using assault style weapons.

Roadrunner
05-19-2009, 9:36 PM
The last politician I can remember being shot in DC was Reagan, then Lincoln (there was a failed attempt on Truman). Reagan was shot by an out-of-towner nut-job, Lincoln by an actor, and the Truman attempt by Puerto Rican Nationalists.

And remember, Reagan's attacker shot him AFTER the D.C. gun ban was implemented. Amazing how they seem to forget that little tidbit of info.

RomanDad
05-19-2009, 9:49 PM
The last politician I can remember being shot in DC was Reagan, then Lincoln (there was a failed attempt on Truman). Reagan was shot by an out-of-towner nut-job, Lincoln by an actor, and the Truman attempt by Puerto Rican Nationalists.

You forgot James Garfield.... Poor James Garfield....:(

BroncoBob
05-19-2009, 9:52 PM
If they keep repeating it the sheep will believe it.

TheBundo
05-19-2009, 9:54 PM
What's wrong with you guys?

Don't you realize that D.C. is the safest city in the USA due its gun laws? At least, it WAS the safest city, until that decision last year. Since then, crime has skyrocketed 100 billion percent, and every politician has been assassinated by criminals that are now allowed to purchase semi-automatic-assault-type AK-16s with heat-seeking incendiary projectiles and RPGs in city limits. Those fiends. If only it were still illegal to commit crimes and assassinate people...

This man should be declared a hero. Not the kind of hero you put on paper money, though. Hmm, maybe we could name some coins after him...

I'm thinking of an entirely new coin, the kind that fits in pay toilets and parking meters

TheBundo
05-19-2009, 9:58 PM
You forgot James Garfield.... Poor James Garfield....:(

Yep, how could I forget him? Greatest President ever. :43:

7x57
05-19-2009, 9:58 PM
One thing people should keep in mind is that this is part of a recent pattern we should celebrate. We're seeing new "reasons" for gun-banning, for example the magical Mexican ability to buy guns in the US that *we* can't buy here and now this.

Now, why new reasons all of a sudden? Because the old ones aren't working, I think. Their feet are slipping, and they're casting about for more traction. That's good--they're not working because we're turning the tide, and in spite of the way they dismissed it and whistled as they walked past the graveyard Heller and Incorporation are looming over the horizon like a squadron of B-29s over Dresden.

The natural response is to both turn up the intensity and look for new strategies, and that's what they're doing. Yes, it's potentially dangerous, that's why they do it. But they're doing it because the old strategies for incremental gun confiscation (which is where all their roads lead) are not working. Did you expect them to roll over and play dead?

:party:

Second interesting trend--all these "new ideas" for gun-banning seem to have an international tie-in: Mexico, foreign VIPs, using international law as precedent. Why? Surely because *they've run out of options at home.* Once again, did you expect them to just quit? No, they're committed to making war on the Constitution and individual freedom. But their desperation is the measure of our success.

So the more outrageous and illegal the gun-banning ideas get, the more we should be doing this:

:jump:

7x57

tiki
05-19-2009, 10:24 PM
Yeah, I am not convinced that a professional assassin is going to fly into, then hunt around DC for a high power weapon, manage to find one, then try to kill a VIP.

Come on, everyone knows that international assassins buy thier guns at Walmart.

N6ATF
05-20-2009, 1:34 AM
I hope this is not a dupe, I did use the search function. :D

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/DCs-AG-cites-danger-to-VIPs-if-Congress-axes-citys-gun-laws-44678742.html

Is he for real?

Absolutely. Not only is he supporting his lower-paid criminal brethren by disarming their victims for them, he doesn't want anyone with guns nearby to depose him and his fellow traitors in the seat of U.S. federal government... if they finally attain the power to order genocide of all law-abiding gun owners.

JDoe
05-20-2009, 7:33 AM
Wow, just wow. Some of the gun grabbers rants are starting to resemble satire.

The Wingnut
05-20-2009, 11:01 AM
...are looming over the horizon like a squadron of B-29s over Dresden.



I'm such a huge nerd: You'd be more correct - although it would be less impressive - to say B-24s, since only one B-29 was ever in the ETO during WWII. :p

Sutcliffe
05-20-2009, 11:48 AM
In DC that would be rare as hen's teeth. Isn't the Attorney General supposed to protect the people of his city? VIP's are somehow more important and above the common man?He's really doing a bang up job of protecting the people.

SgtDinosaur
05-20-2009, 1:19 PM
As if the criminals in D.C. don't already have guns.

7x57
05-20-2009, 2:22 PM
I'm such a huge nerd: You'd be more correct - although it would be less impressive - to say B-24s, since only one B-29 was ever in the ETO during WWII. :p

So...think how impressive it would be for them to come from nowhere. ;)

Ah. Fair point. I originally put down B-17, as that's a well known WWII bomber, then changed it to something with a bigger payload. Neither choice had much thought as to authenticity.

And yeah, you're a huge nerd. And so am I for being interested.

7x57

bwiese
05-20-2009, 2:36 PM
Ah. Fair point. I originally put down B-17, as that's a well known WWII bomber, then changed it to something with a bigger payload. Neither choice had much thought as to authenticity.


My dad (the late "Bill Sr." - but "Bill Jr" back then) was in B17s over Dresden.

At the outset of the Dresden raid, we were kind enough to let the krauts know we'd be bombing them the next day: we leafletted Dresden in the initial raid. Lotta Americans died that day for no good reason.

grahlaika
05-20-2009, 3:03 PM
This is what happens when lawmakers pass laws based on fictional Hollywood movie events (Shooter, Smokin' Aces, etc.)...

7x57
05-20-2009, 4:34 PM
My dad (the late "Bill Sr." - but "Bill Jr" back then) was in B17s over Dresden.


A small salute to Bill Sr., then. I had great-uncle who was a decorated gunner in the Pacific, over Rabaul I think.


At the outset of the Dresden raid, we were kind enough to let the krauts know we'd be bombing them the next day: we leafletted Dresden in the initial raid. Lotta Americans died that day for no good reason.

Gosh, it was just repaying the German kindness when they chivalrously warned London before the blitz. Oh, wait....

7x57

crazy
05-20-2009, 7:19 PM
That guy needs to go smoke crack in a hotel room with the ex-mayor.

lioneaglegriffin
05-20-2009, 8:27 PM
A small salute to Bill Sr., then. I had great-uncle who was a decorated gunner in the Pacific, over Rabaul I think.



Gosh, it was just repaying the German kindness when they chivalrously warned London before the blitz. Oh, wait....

7x57

Thats what the Radar Stations were for. ;).

DDT
05-20-2009, 8:30 PM
Gosh, it was just repaying the German kindness when they chivalrously warned London before the blitz. Oh, wait....


What we did to Dresden made the blitz look like a Sunday walk in the park. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have fire bombed them nor am I saying that warning them was the strategically the best thing we could have done. But I will say that we tore that place down in a way that has never been done before or since. Though Tokyo was close.

DDT
05-20-2009, 8:31 PM
That guy needs to go smoke crack in a hotel room with the ex-mayor.

How do you think he came up with this idea?

7x57
05-20-2009, 10:48 PM
What we did to Dresden made the blitz look like a Sunday walk in the park. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have fire bombed them nor am I saying that warning them was the strategically the best thing we could have done. But I will say that we tore that place down in a way that has never been done before or since. Though Tokyo was close.

While not disagreeing with anything you said, I just want to point out that you're reading far to heavy stuff into my light little joke. :rolleyes:

In times past I was known to use Hamburg and Dresden to point out that the two A-bombs were not particularly unique in the scale of destruction, only in the ease of achieving it. However, no amount of logic will really overcome the ensorcelment that words like "atomic" and "nuclear" cast over people's minds, so I haven't done that for a long time.

Hmm, usually I'm the nit-picker, and I don't like the reversal going on on this thread. I'm going to have to get my game on and start doing the same. :chris:

7x57

DDT
05-20-2009, 11:13 PM
While not disagreeing with anything you said, I just want to point out that you're reading far to heavy stuff into my light little joke. :rolleyes:


LOL... Isn't the the WWII nit picking thread? I must have posted to the wrong thread.

lioneaglegriffin
05-21-2009, 12:37 AM
In times past I was known to use Hamburg and Dresden to point out that the two A-bombs were not particularly unique in the scale of destruction, only in the ease of achieving it. However, no amount of logic will really overcome the ensorcelment that words like "atomic" and "nuclear" cast over people's minds, so I haven't done that for a long time.

7x57

yes Napalm jelly may seem unimpresive compared to a nuke but at least with a nuke you evaporate, but with napalm you have jelly that burns even underwater, talk about torture.

Mulay El Raisuli
05-21-2009, 7:27 AM
I'm such a huge nerd: You'd be more correct - although it would be less impressive - to say B-24s, since only one B-29 was ever in the ETO during WWII. :p



Another nerd chiming in. What was the sole B-29 in the ETO doing there???? I thought they all went to the PTO.

The Raisuli