TexasCHLforum.com

"Bi-Partisan Bill Introduced to Restore the Second Amendment Rights of D.C. Residents

"This week, in a bi-partisan effort, Congressmen Travis Childers (D-Miss.), John Dingell (D-Mich.), John Tanner (D-Tenn.), Mike Ross (D-Ark.), and Mark Souder (R-Ind.), along with 47 of their colleagues, introduced the "Second Amendment Enforcement Act" (H.R. 6691). This critical legislation overturns D.C.'s recently enacted emergency laws that continue to defy the recent Supreme Court ruling by continuing to restrict District of Columbia residents' right to self-defense." More here.

Four Democrats (one a Yankee, at that) and one Republican??

Jim

57Coastie wrote: ... Travis Childers (D-Miss.), John Dingell (D-Mich.), John Tanner (D-Tenn.), Mike Ross (D-Ark.), and Mark Souder (R-Ind.) ...

Four Democrats (one a Yankee, at that) and one Republican??

They're pro-gun Democrats from pro-gun districts. They need to sponsor this bill to show their constituents that they're truly pro-gun. Their party, which would oppose passage, suffers nothing by letting them introduce the bill, which will probably languish and die.

They get to show their constituents they "did something", even if nothing gets done.

Welcome to politics. Be sure to shower and disinfect thoroughly when you're done.

Chris Cox of the NRA was on their internet show last night. He sounded very upbeat and positive about passage of the legislation. You can hear last nights show again today. http://www.nranews.com/nranews.aspx

imo, It's either pass legislation, or let Democrat Fenty continue to hold up the Second Amendment and Supreme Court for mockery.
I feel like a majority of the people want this issue settled, not playing one game after another with their rights.

John Dingell for years has been a barbed thorn in the kidney of the company I work for.

I'd love to hate him if it weren't for his pro-gun stance. As an otherwise liberal Democrat, no less.

I agree that DC municipal thumb-nosing needs to be smacked down...hard. DC is not a state, it's a municipality...and not a large one at that, demographically speaking.

The Heller decision was limited, but SCOTUS seemed, to me, to be pretty darned clear in its decision, and in its adjudication of the Second Amendment to be an individual right.

How can DC still pretend that they are above the explicit decision of SCOTUS?

Skiprr wrote: How can DC still pretend that they are above the explicit decision of SCOTUS?

Because those running the show view themselves as dictator-in-charge?

Anygunanywhere