Having just read “City in the Crossfire”, an article in today’s Washington Post as well as "Gun Bill Dangerous, D.C. Chief Tells House”, also in today’s “Post, I find myself once again in an all too familiar place. Working on Roy Carter’s campaign I am exuberant that his opponent, Virginia Foxx, is again making a fool of herself during meetings of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and yet, as a constituent and voter, terrified at some of the decisions she can influence in Congress.
Washington D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier and other witnesses testified in front of the committee yesterday regarding the consequences of H.R. 6691, a bill that would eliminate most of Washington D.C.’s gun laws and would allow residents to carry loaded semiautomatic rifles in the streets. The District would be barred from requiring that firearms be registered or from taking steps to regulate the possession or use of firearms. As the editorial section of the post stated, “Few would have predicted in the awful days after Sept. 11, 2001, that just seven years later, members of Congress would actually be considering legislation to make the nation’s capital harder to protect.”
“Imagine,” Ms. Lanier told the committee, “how difficult it will be for law enforcement to safeguard the public, not to mention the new president at the inaugural parade, if carrying semiautomatic rifles were suddenly to become legal in Washington.”
Lanier went back and forth with legislators who said that the measure is necessary to allow D.C. residents to protect themselves.
The post noted the “irksome” grandstanding of Virginia Foxx, who was “more interested in telling the chief how to do her job than in hearing her concerns”.
For all of their fear-mongering, saying that Democrats are weak on national security, I find it nauseating that House Republicans like Foxx are so in favor of this bill saying that terrorists are unlikely to buy weapons legally. The real issue, they said, is the District’s high crime rate and resident’s ability to defend themselves.
“I find it really astonishing the elected officials and appointed officials here would want to continue practices that do no good for the citizens,” said Rep. Virginia Foxx. Referring to Lanier’s remark that D.C. residents can already protect themselves at home by legally owning shotguns or pistols, Foxx said, “What an arrogant comment.”
What I find astonishing and arrogant is the completely ridiculous idea that we should not be regulating the registration and use of semiautomatic handguns and rifles that have the capability of firing of 30 rounds at a time. Perhaps terrorists have not purchased their weapons legally in the past, luckily, by passing H.R. 6691 they will be able to now. How can any elected official support this bill and claim they have a monopoly on issues of national security?
The ideology that D.C. is suffering from a high crime rate, so we should make semiautomatic weapons more accessible to anyone who wants to carry them, is absurd!
I can not fathom that mentality. Talk about elected officials continuing practices that do no good for citizens!
I am completely for the 2nd Amendment. I believe citizens should have the right to bear arms. I never agree with taking away people’s rights. However, what does allowing someone to carry a semiautomatic weapon down the streets of our nation’s capitol do for our citizens? What does it do for our law enforcement? What does it do for national security? What does it do for common sense?
It does, however, give Virginia Foxx another platform to get her name in the national press. It worked Ms. Foxx! Congratulations! You have made it into not one, but two articles in the Washington Post today. They wrote all about your irksome grandstanding, and your attempt to tell Police Chief Lanier how to do her job. Talk about arrogance!