Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Which is a civil right in DC the RKBA or the right to vote in Congressional Elections?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    Amazing isn’t it. Voting rights are seen as civil rights even though the Constitution does not afford persons living in the Federal District congressional “Voting rights”. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, which is an individual right is seen as “Poisonous” by the Washington Post.



    DC gun laws will be gutted by SCOTUS next year when they tell the District what “Bear” means. Too bad they didn’t learn when they were told what “Keep” means.



    Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/28/AR2009102804142.html?wpisrc=newsletter





    The Washington Post



    The Democrats' dodge on voting rights

    D.C. representation in Congress isn't being seen as the civil rights issue it is

    Thursday, October 29, 2009

    "DO THE DEMOCRATS have the political will to get this done?" That's the question recently posed by an advocate for voting rights for the District. If action is the measure, the answer -- sadly -- is no. Despite Democratic control of the White House and Congress, the 600,000-odd residents of the nation's capital are no closer to getting their rights as American citizens.

    A bill that would give the District a voting member in the House of Representatives, along with an extra seat for Utah, remains in limbo even as advocates such as DC Vote executive director Ilir Zherka say that there's majority support in both houses. The immediate problem is that the Senate passed the bill with a poisonous amendment (courtesy of the ethically challenged Sen. John Ensign of Nevada and other Republicans) gutting D.C. gun laws. Democratic leaders say that they are at a loss as to how to proceed; bringing the bill to the floor would probably mean a messy floor fight with Democrats forced to cast a politically difficult vote on guns. The gun language is unpalatable to D.C. leaders, but the National Rifle Association is threatening to retaliate against any lawmakers who oppose it.

    We don't deny the legislative difficulties. But when they really care, Democratic leaders manage to devise legislative strategies around far greater obstacles. They extended hate-crime protections to gay men and lesbians by attaching the measure to the must-pass national defense authorization act; there's talk now of attaching an increase in the debt limit to the equally important defense spending bill. It seems that righting the historic wrong of disenfranchised Americans is less vital as far as they are concerned.

    D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) has proposed a variety of ideas on how to advance the bill. But the reaction from party leaders, as the Web site Politico reported, seems to be "forget it." No doubt Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), looking ahead to his own tough reelection battle, sees no gain in irritating the powerful gun lobby. In fact, Mr. Reid voted for the Ensign amendment, making it easier for other Democrats to follow suit. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says that she's looking for opportunities to pass the bill, but to date that hasn't involved pressing members to put principle ahead of political interests. President Obama, who sponsored voting rights legislation as a senator, has done nothing on the issue.

    It is increasingly clear that D.C. voting rights are being treated as a special-interest issue that is losing out to other party priorities -- and not as the civil rights issue that it is and that Democratic leaders have long claimed to believe it to be.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, which is an individual right is seen as “Poisonous” by the Washington Post.
    Not in the context of the article (or the bill in question).

    The gun amendment is poisonous to the bill. It will kill it. That's the purpose of the amendment; to ensure that the bill is never passed.

    As to the ethics of adding poisonous provisos to bills: It's wrong. It's wrong in all cases, including this one. Bills should be debated and decided on their merits, not forced to-and-fro in the process by manipulative amendments.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, which is an individual right is seen as “Poisonous” by the Washington Post.
    Not in the context of the article (or the bill in question).

    The gun amendment is poisonous to the bill. It will kill it. That's the purpose of the amendment; to ensure that the bill is never passed.

    As to the ethics of adding poisonous provisos to bills: It's wrong. It's wrong in all cases, including this one. Bills should be debated and decided on their merits, not forced to-and-fro in the process by manipulative amendments.
    Amen. Citizens of the district should have their right to vote and their right to keep and bear arms: both -- through separate legislation.

  4. #4
    Regular Member riverrat10k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    on a rock in the james river
    Posts
    1,453

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    Bills should be debated and decided on their merits, not forced to-and-fro in the process by manipulative amendments.
    I agree 100%. To behave otherwise is politics, not governance.

    ETA: did I just agree with Donkey?
    Remember Peter Nap and Skidmark. Do them proud. Be active. Be well informed. ALL rights matter.

    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when you may have to back up your acts with your life."

    --Robert A. Heinlein

    Hey NSA! *&$# you. Record this--- MOLON LABE!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Post imported post

    riverrat10k wrote:
    deanf wrote:
    Bills should be debated and decided on their merits, not forced to-and-fro in the process by manipulative amendments.
    I agree 100%. To behave otherwise is politics, not governance.

    ETA: did I just agree with Donkey?

    Heaven forbid! Lets say you just agreed with Dean!


  6. #6
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    deanf wrote:
    The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, which is an individual right is seen as “Poisonous” by the Washington Post.
    Not in the context of the article (or the bill in question).

    The gun amendment is poisonous to the bill. It will kill it. That's the purpose of the amendment; to ensure that the bill is never passed.

    As to the ethics of adding poisonous provisos to bills: It's wrong. It's wrong in all cases, including this one. Bills should be debated and decided on their merits, not forced to-and-fro in the process by manipulative amendments.
    Amen. Citizens of the district should have their right to vote and their right to keep and bear arms: both -- through separate legislation.
    The Federal District has an observer in the congress. They have no right to vote for a congressman any more that those that live in Puerto Rico or Guam, though there is some hope for those in Puerto Rico and Guam because those territories can become states because they are not part of the Federal District.

    We will soon have a right to bear arms in the federal district in spite of the freedom hating democrat party henchmenon the city council that made unjust laws.

    They do not deserve statehood. Have you seen their "New Columbia State Constitution." No Mention of the right to keep and bear arms. Bunch of certified Anti-Freedom Nut Jobs.

    P.S. Why would we want to give the people that re-elected a felon and crack addict to their city council?

    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •