After Orlando Massacre, Kentucky Republican Pushes For Open Carry In D.C.

By: Martin Austermuhle
June 20, 2016

Last week, Massie posted an image of himself on Twitter holding an AR-15 rifle, with the caption: "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

Residents of Kentucky can openly carry handguns without a permit, and now a Republican representative from the Bluegrass State wants D.C. residents to enjoy the same right.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) this week introduced two gun-related amendments to a federal spending bill, one that would allow residents and visitors to openly carry handguns without a permit and a second that would do away with the city's gun-free zones — the 1,000-foot buffer zones around schools, universities, pools, playgrounds, and public housing where carrying a gun carries a stiffer penalty.
The amendments will be formally introduced on Tuesday afternoon, when the House Rules Committee considers all proposed changes to the fiscal 2017 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, which allocates local and federal funds for D.C.
In an email to WAMU 88.5, Massie said the amendments are intended to prevent an Orlando-style tragedy in the nation's capital.
"Gun control is not the solution. The only practical way to have prevented this tragedy is by eliminating gun-free zones where security is inadequate to protect law abiding citizens who are otherwise capable, willing, and endowed (by their Creator with the right) to defend themselves," said Massie. "I introduced these amendments to reduce the likelihood of a similar tragedy in D.C.”
This isn't the first time that Massie has gotten involved in D.C.'s gun laws. Two years ago, he introduced an amendment that would have gutted the city's restrictive gun laws. The House of Representatives passed a bill that included Massie's measure, but it was later removed by the Senate.
At the time, Massie argued that strict gun laws leave citizens vulnerable to crime. On on gun-free zones, last year he introduced a bill that would have rescinded a federal law imposing additional fines for carrying or using guns around schools.
D.C. officials have long resisted the repeated Republican attempts to alter the city's gun laws, arguing that an urban environment like the nation's capital should not have the same permissive gun laws as places like Kentucky. They also decry attempts by Congress to legislate for the city, and say it's hypocritical that many Republicans favor lighter gun laws for D.C. but do little to change the laws that restrict the possession of guns in the halls of Congress itself.
But Massie, who otherwise hews to the Republican Party's support for smaller government, said the U.S. Constitution allows him to weigh in on D.C.'s laws.
"The U.S. Constitution — the supreme law of the land — states unambiguously in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 that Congress has the authority to legislate 'in all Cases whatsoever' over the District of Columbia," said Massie.
D.C.'s gun laws have long been the target of lawsuits. In 2008, the Supreme Court overturned the city's ban on handguns, and in 2014 a federal judge followed up by tossing out the ban on the carrying of handguns outside the home. Current law allows residents who cite a "good reason" to qualify for a concealed-carry permit, but a federal judge recently said that the "good reason" provisions is likely unconstitutional.
But that legal fight is certain to continue. Not only have D.C. officials said they would appeal, but last week the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuits ruled that a similar law in San Diego passes constitutional muster.
And it's not just D.C.'s gun laws that are being targeted in Congress this week. Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.) is set to introduce an amendment to the same spending bill to repeal two D.C. laws that restrict the ability of employers in the city to discriminate against employees for their decision to use birth control or seek an abortion.
Though a similar attempt to repeal the laws passed the House last year, it fizzled after President Obama expressed opposition to the move because it would "undermine the reproductive freedom and private health care decisions of the citizens of the District of Columbia."
Republicans have also taken aim at the 2013 referendum that gave D.C. budget autonomy, saying that the vote is null and void and that only Congress can appropriate funds for D.C.
In a statement, D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) said she would fight any amendments added to the spending bill, calling them an affront to home rule.

NOTE:  This eliminating "Gun Free Zones" is the latest NRA bullshit regarding the means by which we can go see a movie or send our kids off to elementary school or attend a nightclub - gay or otherwise - without fear of being slaughtered by a AR-15 wielding nut job (declaring devotion to ISIS or just whacked) any time of the day or night. 
But here's my question:  How would you residents of the 50 states of the United States feel, let's say you live in Florida, if some Senator or Congressman from New Hampshire was able to tell you how Florida can spend your tax money or which laws you can pass?  You wouldn't like it would you?  But that's precisely the situation we 680,000 residents of the District of Columbia (we are larger than Vermont and Wyoming) face every single day that Congress is in session.  
True, it's the Constitution that has set us up for this abuse, but then the Constitution also believed that women were just too high strung, nervous and dumb to vote.  It took 131 years to correct this error by our Founding Fathers, but better late than never, I suppose.  And as far as all of us DC residents are concerned, it's way past time for us to receive all the rights, privileges and responsibilities afforded by the Constitution.  This includes the right of us to determine what laws we want right here in our home territory.   

NOTE:  This morning, CBS news is reporting that Omar Mateen - "Radical Jihadist Islamist Terrorist" extraordinaire -  had a two months long sexual affair with another man, according to the other man who told the FBI.  Us gay men knew from day one that it would only be a matter of time before something like this would be revealed.  And trust me, there will be more.  Plus they also reported that the FBI has uncovered plane tickets that Mateen bought for him, his wife and child for a flight to Los Angeles the day after the Pulse slaughter. This, I believe is a first - an ISIS inspired self-radicalized terrorist planning ahead for his and his family's escape.

One might conclude that this could be the reason why the FBI - who investigated Mateen a few years ago, then dropped the case - isn't issuing Breaking News Updates confirming definite, ironclad, and undeniable ISIS/Hezbollah/Al Qaeda terrorist ties.  

Let's see what Fox News makes of these rather startling revelations.  


Popular posts from this blog