Welcome to TNGunOwners.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

MacGyver

GOP Congressman Shot

89 posts in this topic

I generally like legislation that makes carrying available for more people, but in this case I have to say screw you, Mo Brooks! What makes him and his legislature buddies so special that they'll get to carry, but the Plebeians of Washington D.C. still can't lawfully defend themselves? He cites " Washington, D.C.'s rather restrictive gun laws " Then rescind those laws for everyone.

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so if I understand this correctly, if this piece of legislation were to be passed they would be in effect be exempting themselves from the law that applies to the rest of us.  This is elitism!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, what do yall think about guns being taken away?

Sent from my FRD-L04 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What it produce more good than bad results. Our vice versa

Sent from my FRD-L04 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Worriedman said:

"Mo Brooks tells Fox he will introduce bill allowing lawmakers to be armed"

Well Mo, we are targets also. Just because they don’t have our names on a piece of paper in their pocket we don’t get the same right to defend ourselves and our families? Don’t forget us.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Some lawmakers already have been made special deputy US marshals in order to carry a gun anywhere in the country, including Senator Dianne Fienstein.  Those silly politicians don't need any more laws to help them carry guns because if they want to carry bad enough they are either wealthy enough to hire private security or off duty police or they can pull strings and at the very least have themselves and their staff made reserve local police.  They can get non resident DC, VA, and Maryland licenses to cover the DC metro area.  I cannot believe a federal level politician could not have the influence to get a may issue license in DC or Maryland.

What would make legal carry for a non federal LEO in the Capitol mall area (tourist area) of DC difficult is that most of the buildings you go to, including the offices where the Congress people are, have metal detectors.  I've heard that some of those buildings will allow out of state LEO's to carry, some will check guns, and some will not check guns.  Of course I would be very surprised if the Congress critters themselves had to go through those metal detectors to their own office buildings.  I mean what Capitol policeman (that is who protects Congress) is going to tell basically his boss that he can't carry?  My guess is if those politicians want to carry, they can carry and get by with it whether legal or not.      

Edited by 300winmag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only have a couple questions about this:

1) Has any of them that are getting these authorized carry permits been through any type of a training program to show them which end of the gun the bullet comes out of?

2) I wonder how many of them could pass Through a Back Ground Check????

Just curious!! 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, 300winmag said:

Some lawmakers already have been made special deputy US marshals in order to carry a gun anywhere in the country, including Senator Dianne Fienstein.  ..

Myth. She had a California permit only for a while back in the 90's, after a bomb was planted at her home and her windows shot out.

- OS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are ways that these folks can arm themselves... As others have opined... We dont need "polititian elitism" in toting weapons wherever they want... If we are a "Nation of Laws" (...which, by the way, i think we can quibble about...), they need to get their carry permit just like the citizens in their home districts get theirs... No more, no less... Period...

"Fair dealin" leroy

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah they need to get a license (non resident VA licenses are available) just like anyone else and carry concealed in Virginia very easy where this incident happened.  If they want to carry in Maryland and DC, licenses are available to non residents and I'm sure federal politicians can make phone calls and get one easier than a lot of people.  The higher up Congress folks like majority and minority leaders are protected 24/7 by Capitol police everywhere they go.  Capitol police are also at the Congressional office buildings right by the Capitol.  I highly doubt any Capitol police would keep a congressman or senator from carrying in his own DC office building or even in public in DC whether or not he has any sort of license.  Have you ever heard of one getting arrested for it?  Probably not a problem for them that want to carry compared to normal people.  

Edited by 300winmag
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hypocrisy is strong here. This is from yesterday.

National reciprocity legislation has been sitting in Congress since January 3, 2017, and we have heard of a growing roster of co-sponsors but little else. Then suddenly, following the June 14 attack in Alexandria, numerous Republican Congressional members were consumed with national reciprocity.

But the problem is that many House members now focused on national reciprocity are consumed with special carry privileges for Congresscarry privileges the common man will never enjoy.

For example, Breitbart News reported that Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX) put forward post-Alexandria legislation that will give congressmen “the ability to attempt to qualify for a concealed carry permit – either through their home state or a training program created by the United States Capitol Police (USCP).” And for those who acquire a permit, the bill will:

Direct the USCP to grant Members of Congress the ability to concealed carry in nearly every conceivable scenario – including federal parks and buildings, the national mall, to and from their offices, at schools and military bases – with only a few limited restrictions.  These would include National Special Security Events, other areas under the direct jurisdiction of the Secret Service and commercial airliners.

To be clear, Babin also supports the national reciprocity legislation introduced in Congress on January 3. But that reciprocity bill has not been passed and, even when it does, it will not give the common man the carry privileges Babin wants to secure for the ruling class.

The chasm between the common man and the ruling class was well illustrated by Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), during a June 21 interview on Breitbart News Daily. Like Babin, Brooks supports two separate approaches to national reciprocity, one for the common man and one for the ruling class.

After assuring listeners that he supports reciprocity legislation for average Americans, Brooks said that people have “to recognize that congressmen are different from the regular citizens of the United States.” He described the difference:

[Congressmen] are high-profile targets of lone wolf shooters, as we saw [June 14]. We are also high-profile targets of Muslim and other terrorists, and that distinguishes us from the general public. The general public needs to have the right to bear arms to defend themselves from criminal activity. We not only have to be able to defend ourselves from criminal activity, but also from the high-profile target status that we are burdened with as members of the United States Congress.

Missing from Brooks’ illustration is the fact that “regular citizens” face terror threats as well; such threats are not specific to the ruling class. For example, 49 “regular citizens” were killed in the June 12, 2016, Orlando terrorist attack and 14 “regular citizens” were killed in the December 2, 2015, San Bernardino terrorist attack.

Ought not these attacks–and others than could be listed–justify calls to give “regular citizens” the same carry privileges being sought by Babin, Brooks, and the rest of the ruling class?

 

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/23/national-reciprocity-america-first-must-replace-congress-first/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For example, 49 “regular citizens” were killed in the June 12, 2016, Orlando terrorist attack and 14 “regular citizens” were killed in the December 2, 2015, San Bernardino terrorist attack.

I was also planning on raising this same question. Was there any elected officials victims in either one of these attacks?? .........................:doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on now, lets all just hold our breath and wait for the trickle-down of our own God-given rights...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

Connect With Us

The Fine Print

Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.
TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.
Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions. TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.