-
When Terrorists Deny Each Other
May 7, 2013 | 166 comments
-
Barack Obama, Gun Enthusiast
February 4, 2013 | 130 comments
-
Principled Compromise
June 22, 2012 | 56 comments
-
Obamacare’s Preemptive Regulatory Strike
March 29, 2012 | 69 comments
-
Santorum’s College Lesson
February 29, 2012 | 102 comments
The Congressional Spectator
Shielding Congress From the People
The wrong response to the Tucson tragedy.
When the rhetoric about the rhetoric dies away, lawmakers will still yearn to do something — anything — to prevent another shooting like the tragedy in Arizona last weekend. Or more accurately, they will yearn to have a record, come campaign season, of having tried to do something. A shiny piece of heavily bullet-pointed campaign lit is an underappreciated motivator for political behavior.
What are their options? They’ve tried stifling speech and banning guns and scary-sounding gun components. They will try both again, but the smart ones know those are unlikely to pass. The path with the most light at the end of it might be the one less traveled: shielding the politicians from the people.
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., doesn’t have a specific proposal for protecting members of Congress, but he knows that whatever measures are to be taken, they will cost more — exactly 15 percent more. That’s how much Rep. Jackson wants to increase the House budget, purely for security, of course. He has proposed repealing the 5 percent cut House Republicans just made and adding an additional 10 percent so members can buy themselves adequate protection.
Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., has picked this week to dust off his See-Through-Dome-Of-Member-Comfiness. He has said he intends to introduce legislation to create a Plexiglass-type barrier separating the House from the gallery, where the yokels sit. By doming members in like tiny models in a Museum of American History exhibit, he hopes to protect them from bomb-throwing citizens. Because, as the meltdown of Jared Lee Loughner showed us all, the real threat to America’s politicians is D.C. tourists armed with pipe bombs.
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has an even more neato idea. He wants a protective buffer around the president, vice president, all members of Congress, and federal judges. His wouldn’t be made of Plexiglass, but paper. King wants a law forbidding anyone from being armed within 1,000 feet of any of the aforementioned federal officials.
One assumes that court bailiffs are excluded from King’s proposed Armless Circle of Safety. But what about average citizens with concealed carry permits who just happen to end up behind a federal judge in the check-out line at the supermarket? Or hunters who pull up behind a member of Congress at a traffic light? If Justice Antonin Scalia takes Elena Kagan hunting, as he has proposed, would they both be in violation of the law? Would any other hunter who wanders within 1,000 feet of them?
If this bill passes, it should contain this provision: all members of Congress and federal judges are required at all times to wear a head band that projects a laser-beam circle extending exactly 1,000 feet so the people will know the precise boundaries of the Armless Circle of Safety.
Imagine if King’s bill passed and, say, multiple U.S. senators and representatives decide to run for president at the same time, as in 2008. New Hampshire is an open carry state that also allows concealed carry with a permit. It’s also full of hunters. In the heart of primary season, it’s nearly impossible in some parts of the state to go two days without traipsing within 1,000 feet of a presidential candidate — entirely by accident. New Hampshire doesn’t have enough excess prison capacity to hold all the people who would have to be arrested if King’s proposal becomes law.
During the 2008 primary, Sen. John McCain’s campaign received death threats directed at the senator. His staff wanted to hire security personnel. McCain refused. He wasn’t going to be scared by some random death threats. Knowing that someone might be out there waiting to do him harm, he nonetheless waded into every crowd, shaking hands, talking with voters, and listening to people. McCain understood the importance of connecting directly with citizens. He knew that entailed certain risks, but that was the price of being a public official in a republic.
In 2009, Rep. Carol Shea-Porter, D-N.H., also received threats. She responded by holding constituent meetings in federal buildings. People had to pass through metal detectors to get in, and armed officers were present in the rooms and hallways. When people got angry at her because they perceived she wasn’t listening, she literally erected barriers between herself and the people. A year later, she lost re-election.
In New Hampshire for a house party yesterday, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who is mulling a run for president, rejected the idea of erecting barriers, either physical or in the law, to protect elected officials from the people. He said that if he decides to run, he won’t bother with added security. “People should have access to their public officials,” he told me in an interview.
Santorum expects people to get excited, even angry, about politics. “Passion is part of it. It damned well should be; this is your country.”
You know what? He’s right. It damned well should be. And with passion comes the risk of violence. As much as we might lament that truth, it is nonetheless an inescapable reality. Congress can erect barriers between its members and the people, but that won’t protect lawmakers from being killed by determined crazies. All it will do is further divide the people from their elected representatives. We need less of that separation, not more.
About the Author
Andrew Cline is editorial page editor of the New Hampshire Union Leader. His Twitter ID is @Drewhampshire.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (63) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Andrew Cline
More Articles From The Congressional Spectator
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/01/12/shielding-congress-from-the-pe
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
SC Mike| 1.12.11 @ 6:45AM
Not only is King’s neato proposal silly, it would have done nothing to stop last Saturday’s shooting and could have made it deadlier. The shooter would of course have ignored the 1,000-foot firearm ban, but law-abiding citizens would have complied. That, after all, is why they are not criminals, they adhere to the law. One of the citizens who helped detain the shooter, Joe Zamudio, was armed and ran toward the commotion when the shooting started. He arrived after others had disarmed the shooter, but did assist in holding the criminal down until law enforcement arrived. He did not draw his pistol, there was no need to.
My point is that law-abiding citizens with concealed weapons permits are more likely to assist in such situations; one of their motivations in getting the permit was probably to assist in such instances. Imagine the effect of King’s law: at the sound of gunfire, the law-abiding will have to ensure that no federal official is around! One may assist state and local officials or regular citizens, but avoid crossing the 1,000-foot King-barrier if a federal official is around. Bizarre, no?
Combine that with House Minority Assistant Leader Clyburn’s proposal that members of Congress not be subject to TSA degradations at airports and we might just as well formalize the new royalty that Clyburn and King seek to establish.
Bow down now…
LiveFreeOrDie| 1.12.11 @ 11:45AM
In New York the 'R' in front of the name must stand for something else. I imagine two scenarios, one with and one without this law.
An insane gunman pulls out a weapon and starts to shoot a "protected" public official along with anyone else in the immediate area. After 40-50 rounds are spent and several people are killed or maimed, brave people subdue him until EVENTUALLY the police arrive. A multi-million dollar court case ensues (tax funded) in order to convict a man on what should be a slam-dunk case.
Or....
As a gunman starts to pull out a weapon, at least two individuals with concealed permits notice and take action as he begins to open fire. After about 8 rounds are fired the gunman lies motionless on the ground, dead from his wounds. Possibly a bystander or two were hit from a stray bullet.
I like scenario number two, while Peter King likes number one. Peter King is a what I like to call a P.O.S. and so is any politician who proposes knee-jerk legislation within hours of a tragic event.
roadmaster| 1.16.11 @ 9:55AM
This lib/prog smoke screen isn't so much for protecting congresscreeps from gun toting crazies as much as it's to shield them from disgruntled constituents who threaten their livelihood with really hard questions, like "when are you going to stop wasting our money?"
Clint| 1.12.11 @ 7:37AM
Like Flies To Horse Poop, Here Come The Gun Grabbers & Fellow Travelers.
John Daniel| 1.12.11 @ 7:52AM
The federal capitol is already a fortress. Maybe security is the justification, but no regular citizen can wander the halls.
Louis Jenkins| 1.12.11 @ 8:05AM
It has already been alluded to. Create a royalty that no mere mortal can get next to. We have crossed over the line from were the politicians mingle freely with the constituency to were the govenors receive the word to rule directly from God, although you can't mention that in pc society. Had enough America?
Anthony| 1.12.11 @ 8:19AM
The insanity continues from those chosen to lead. When will they ever learn?? What exactly is in the DNA of lawmakers that triggers moronic responses to tragic events?
I expected this from Ds, but Peter King, normally a thoughtful and prudent legislator wins the prize for stupidity.
Tell us Peter, just how do you enforce this stupidity? How exactly are normal citizens expected to know that they may be even near an elected official? Will you all now wear yellow vests identifying yourselves so the rest of us know where our exaulted leaders are at all times?
I have a better solution; if Washington got out of peoples way and was a nominal presence in our lives, people might not be fixated on Washington.
If we had term limits, with a steady supply of new faces, the powers to be might not feel so threatened, but that would defeat the whole purpose wouldn't it?
Oh well, now we have to carry pictures of our leaders and tape measures. Good thinking Mr . King, anymore bright ideas?
Anthony| 1.12.11 @ 8:41AM
P.S. In the name of bi- partisanship, Burton and Harry Reid can co-sponsor a bill together, call it the "Dangerous and Smelly Tourists Act of 2011".
Why doesn't Washington just shut down for 3 months and let things settle down.
WE THE PEOPLE would greatly appreciate it. Oh, and consider the 3 months furlough days with no pay, maybe that will cure all of your desires to rush to Washington to rule over the people.
Bob K.| 1.12.11 @ 1:45PM
Hardly thoughtful and prudent in all things. He supported the IRA for years! There were many votes there in his district. Bombs seem to be OK. Guns no!
LarryK| 1.12.11 @ 8:37AM
How about shielding the people from Congress?
Ned| 1.12.11 @ 10:27AM
'Zactly! Put up that plexiglass bowl around Congress, but put the locks on the OUTSIDE... with a little water bottle hung upside down with an on-demand nozzle that they press on to get a drink... and shredded New York Times on the floor
VBMax| 1.12.11 @ 8:56AM
Congress people, if you are that afraid of your own constituents, maybe you ought to just resign.
No one forced you to become a politician. Maybe you could actually do something valuable with the rest of your lives, like learning a trade or providing a service that people actually need.
Stormzeye| 1.12.11 @ 8:58AM
Relocate the seat of government to Guam. When all the lobbyists relocate their offices out there, it will surely capsize. Then we can start over again.
SilentNoMore| 1.12.11 @ 9:32AM
Isn't shooting someone already illegal (if it's not in self defense)? So, Rep. King, what would be the purpose of the 1000 foot law? Shooting another person is already obviously illegal, so what is the point of another law that makes it illegal to possess a firearm within 1000 feet, or 1 mile, or 100 miles of anyone or anything? Let me put this in the most basic of terms so you and all of your gun-control advocating associates can understand: If someone is going to break a most obvious law by shooting another person, then breaking another law DOES NOT MATTER TO THAT PERSON! Only law abiding citizens will obey this law. The LAWBREAKERS (ie. the ones who already plan on breaking the law by shooting people ILLEGALLY) will not obey this law.
So let me get this straight: you want to disarm the law abiding, peaceful citizens and leave them defenseless against violent criminals who will not follow your law? You want to put a wolf into a herd of sheep and take away the shepards’ weapon? I sure hope you have a plan to protect us against these criminals, maybe by taking away our rights to assemble, speak freely, or have a fair trial. This is stupidity and illogic at its' highest. I can't believe people with this level of cognition are representing the citizens of this country.
JimP| 1.12.11 @ 9:39AM
The lilly livers of Congress critters on display is amazing. As John D. already pointed out, The Capitol is already a fortress. They have their own state of the art police department that controls the buildings and grounds of Congress with barricades, police patrols, K-9's etc and they screen every person entering the buildings. A better name for the place would be 'Festung Kapital'. Now these pusillanimous pols (some at least) want a bullet proof window between them and the gallery? IMO, what we have seen from the pols since the shooting smacks of abject cowardice, not caution. Those Congress persons who want to carry concealed have the right idea. Bravo to them. You ran for office, you assumed the risks. Take care of yourself like the rest of us have to do. If both parties had not so monumentally failed the country in the last ten years I doubt they would be over reacting to a lone luntic's murder spree. My impression is that they know they are in effect The Bourbons sitting on a powder keg of disgruntled 'peasants'. If they really want to head off a revolution, they'll start acting like Reagan on steroids and then tell all the leftists who are mad about it to move to North Korea or Cuba which are socialist paradises on earth. Put up or shut up, and stop the violence lefties. Either move or pipe down with your demands, rhetoric and violence.
Radioman777| 1.12.11 @ 10:06AM
Rep's King and Burton are a couple of wusses. My advice: Grow a pair!
justasimplepatriot| 1.12.11 @ 10:38AM
How about passing a law that stipulates if you are a gun owner and are planning to kill someone, you must surrender your guns. This solves everything!
Bill| 1.12.11 @ 10:50AM
Wrong, again, Drew, as usual:
Carol Shea-Porter had 11 town halls, all in regular buildings, AFTER those in the federal buildings. The federal venues were entirely justified, as you know. People were afraid to come to those health care town halls because of the crazy language and behavior and the threatening. Shea-Porter was responsible for people's safety.
Thirteen town halls in one year is real access, by any yardstick. I would say that event have proved her right to be cautious!
Richard Baker| 1.12.11 @ 10:52AM
VBMax:
Agree with your sentiments. Grew up in Northern Virginia and have been to the Congress to watch the proceedings from the gallery many times. The Founders intended the Members of Congress to be accessible to their constituents. If they are frightened then find another career (what I think of career politicians will wait until another time). Remember, this yahoo in Tucson IS crazy as a bedbug. At least we don't meet at the Dueling Oak to settle our differences anymore.
missbosslady| 1.12.11 @ 10:53AM
It is the constant, ceaseless attempts to exert more and more control over our lives that ignites so much passion.
So, naturally in the wake of this atrocity our members of congress are falling all over themselves proposing more ways to exert control over our lives.
Peter King and others have decided to treat an aberration as a common occurrence in an effort to gain even more control over the public.
I'm sure this won't upset anyone. (sarc)
Old Soldier | 1.12.11 @ 10:55AM
King’s proposal may be the idiotic and egotistical nonsense I’ve ever heard. He assumes that us commoners recognize all these jerks. I’ve never heard of Gifford until last week and I couldn’t name a Rep from my state other than my own. But I have to avoid them all on the way to the range or hunting.
How would a member of Congress ever go shopping at a sporting goods store? How would one of them ever buy a gun? As the author pointed out, how would they ever go hunting with a friend? How would they ever visit troops at a base or in the field?
I just lost all respect for King. Idiot.
Richard Baker| 1.12.11 @ 11:00AM
Bill:
God forbid that the constituents should use "crazy language" in expression of their sentiments. After all, the Members of Congress are Royalty who deserve to be fawned over. In a system such as ours, passion is good. I'd rather have passion than a stupor among the populace. Passion keeps these elected Representatives on their toes. Remember what Harry Truman said about heat and the kitchen.
Kishego| 1.12.11 @ 11:02AM
I would like to juxtapose two images. 1.) A snivelling member of congress cowering behind a piece of plexiglass. 2.) A young Soldier walking up a dirt road between abandoned buildings in Afghanistan.
George S| 1.12.11 @ 11:07AM
Congressman King proves once again that court rulings are to be ignored by government if they are inconvenient.
US v. Lopez: carrying a gun near a school is not economic activity and therefore cannot be regulated by the commerce clause. Therefore the Gun Free school zones are unconstitutional.
US v Morrison: Congress cannot punish violence against women as they only have police powers in counterfeiting and piracy.
So, Congressman King, very slowly: you cannot assume a police power to punish gun toters within your 1,000 foot zone as they are not engaging in commerce.
loulou| 1.12.11 @ 11:25AM
I'm surprised at King's behavior. I thought he was a good guy.
Come to find out, he thinks he's royalty.
Time to vote him out. Let him go be a lobbyist.
Franco| 1.12.11 @ 11:48AM
How do we enforce his stupidity? Here's how:
1) Make New Hampshire illegal.
2) Imprison writer David Mamet (for authoring that "knife-and-gun" line President Spock used)
3) Have the DOD raise a special "Praetorian Guard" regiment trained to form the shieldwall formation whenever any public official ventures out from his home. The regiment (or battalion), in full panoply, will accompany the official on walks with the dog, going to the market, taking questions from indufferable proles, etc. The unit will be paid for by a 7% federal surcharge on all ammunition sales.
4) Forced registration of all TeaParty-affiliated citizens, followed by involuntary confinement (for their own protection).
xxx-xx-xxxx| 1.12.11 @ 11:48AM
Equal Protection before the Law doesn't just mean in court!
The only reason the President has protection is because he's the Commander-in-Chief, and only one man.
The rest of Congress should be flying in Coach. I wonder what they will use to cite for Constitutional authority for this?!
Dan| 1.12.11 @ 12:23PM
Sometimes it's hard to remember we're all on the same team. That's why http://mittromneycentral.com/2.....r-dollars/ was so refreshing and timely. Before the race for 2012 officially starts, we should get as many people to read that wonderful piece as we can. Then, in 2012 we can bring America back!
missbosslady| 1.12.11 @ 12:26PM
When the Texas Constitution of 1876 was written, the framers were motivated
primarily by a strong distrust of government, a sentiment caused by the perceived
abuses of state government during Reconstruction. The framers were particularly wary
of executive authority and gave more power to the legislature than to the executive.
Thus, the Texas Legislature is the most important decision-making body in the state. In
spite of that, many Texans still believe the old saying that "neither man nor property is
safe while the legislature is in session." This is also the reason that the Texas state legislature is only in session biennially.
Those old Texans were prescient, no? They were definitely on the right the track, perhaps our federal legislators should take a page from their book.
The real question Americans should be asking is how many laws do we need? Maybe, just maybe if they stopped legislating so much the level of apprehension would decline.
My message to congress, is to politely ask them, to back the eff off already! I'm sick of it!
While legislators pat themselves on the back for "getting so much done", my stomach turns as I know that it is getting done to me.
Government, from the federal to the local level, has trapped us under so many rules and regulations, that at any given time, a majority of Americans are breaking some rule, somewhere.
My local Zoning Dept. spent 5 years, and who knows how much money, developing a new Zoning Code. The new code is 1200 pages long! 1200 pages of rules! A perusal of this tome will lead to the inevitable conclusion that it is 1200 pages of limiting, or elimanting personal property rights.
One large architecture firm, that spent considerable money opposing the new codes, said that some parcels in the city have been regulated to the degree that nothing may be built on them.
Where does it end?
matthew s harrison| 1.12.11 @ 12:46PM
This is simply the opportunity the Dums have been waiting for. The ability to never have to have a town hall again, the opportunity to never have to face the people they are bending over and sticking it to, the opportunity to hide in their ivory towers and lord over we serfs has arrived. This gleeful response on the left to the murders of six and attempted murder and near-mortally wounding of another twelve people is disgusting. These morons trotted out more hateful and violent rhetoric in their accusations of conservatives. They are despicable. They are disgusting. They are un-American. They are sleaze.
It has now become a total embarrassment to carry that blue passport. It will be a colossal relief to retire that passport, never to have to use it again. I cannot wait to move from the US.
It is a wonderful thought to imagine not being afraid of my government any more-a wonderful thought indeed.
Anthony| 1.12.11 @ 1:26PM
I agree with your post, save for the last 2 paragraphs, which take from an otherwise accurate analysis of the minds of the Washington elites.
The gulf between the elected and the electors has gotten a whole lot wider. Congresses response has been most enlightening, a window into the minds of an entire sub group of people who have not a clue of who or what their limited purpose is.
We truly need Term Limits. Washington is infested with self absorbed Neros.
JimP| 1.12.11 @ 1:51PM
What I want to know, Matt, is where/what country can you not be afraid of the government? I will consider moving there also. Meantime, I fatalistically await the apocalyptic end of freedom here, while I do my level best to resist and in effect 'stick it to The Man' in DC.
Shoey| 1.12.11 @ 12:49PM
used to be that I thought Lindsey Graham was the most despicable Republican, and while I still detest Mr. Gramnesty, Pete King has now taken over the top spot. Can the NY TEA Party please "primary" this fool?
Richard Baker| 1.12.11 @ 12:50PM
harrison:
Are you gone, yet? Don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you. Bye.
Chuang Tzu| 1.12.11 @ 2:07PM
What we have here is a blatant example of little men and women, in an oh so deluded way exposing themselves in their smallness.
Woe to the USA, that its similarly deluded citizens have chosen such losers!
“This was the True Man of old: his bearing was lofty and did not crumble; he appeared to lack but accepted nothing; he was dignified in his correctness but not insistent; he was vast in his emptiness but not ostentatious.
Mild and cheerful, he seemed to be happy; reluctant, he could not help doing certain things; annoyed, he let it show in his face; relaxed, he rested in his virtue.
Tolerant, he seemed to be part of the world; towering alone, he could be checked by nothing; withdrawn, he seemed to prefer to cut himself off; bemused, he forgot what he was going to say.
He regarded penalties as the body, rites as the wings, wisdom as what is timely, virtue as what is reasonable.
Because he regarded penalties as the body, he was benign in his killing.
Because he regarded rites as his wings, he got along in the world.
Because he regarded wisdom as what is timely, there were things he could not keep from doing.
Because he regarded virtue as what is reasonable, he was like a man with two feet who gets to the top of the hill.
And yet people really believed that he worked hard to get there.”
“Basic Writings, Chuang Tzu”--- translated by Burton Watson
Oh, how many politicians are BEMUSED enough to forget what to SAY?
They are DEFINED by unfettered saying of all kinds of crap!
bull-gator| 1.12.11 @ 3:06PM
if the c.s. politicians want protection, then have a state trooper from their district escort them to and from public meetings such as head football coaches in the south have a trooper accompany them to each game they coach. problem solved. pay for the protection out of their operating budget...no increase allowed.
Michael L. Hauschild| 1.12.11 @ 3:11PM
About King; these delusional buffoons actually believe that passing such a law, to wit, "don't bring a gun within 1000 feet of a politician" will somehow motivate assassins to carry a copy of the gun statues around so they don't run afoul of the law.
Dixie Pixie| 1.12.11 @ 3:28PM
Here is a thought.
Provide the Congressional personal with mandatory foam pillow suits lest they be harmed by any contact with reality.
Cover the Congressmen and Congresswomen with Kevlar bullet-proof Burkas.
Color code the Burkas according political affliction.
Pinks and pastel prints for the Democrats and bold primary colored plaids for the Republications.
Granted they would look like the Michelin Man wearing a Abstract Art rug but they would be a lot safer.
Of course the protective gear would be heavy so a personal mobility scooter would be necessary.
Fortunately there is a company that advertises on the TV that they can provide scooters for free with the proper Medicaid reimbursement.
With the extra payload capacity provided by the scooter a state of art PA and Entertainment system could be integrated into the scooter.
Of course some may say that Congressional dignity would suffer as the Congress would look like a permanent Shriners Clown Car Parade but safety is priceless.
So would be the entertainment value of such a Congress.
A second thought.
Personal full body "Star Trek" Deflector Shields.
JimP| 1.12.11 @ 5:06PM
LOL Great ideas.
dlg1956| 1.12.11 @ 3:29PM
It goes to prove one thing, NEVER trust a NY politician or for any politician for a mater of fact. He needs to get his mind right and realize the idiocy of his proposal.
Hobbes T. Catt| 1.12.11 @ 4:13PM
A few years ago, I was stopped at a red light. In the car stopped next to me was possibly the stupidest person ever to infest Congress, the late Rep. Julia Carson (D-IN). As as my habit, I carrying my licensed firearm. Congressman King would now criminalize my drive home.
harvey56%| 1.12.11 @ 4:15PM
hey! how about a law requiring that all elected federal officials shall carry a concealed weapon, posess a permit to do so, and be trained in threat recognition. if not, reaign and go home. put the burden on them, not us.
Negro X | 1.12.11 @ 5:42PM
CONGRESS=COWARDS.
Radioman777| 1.12.11 @ 6:40PM
The great genius Peter King hasn't quite figured out that if the 1000' school zone gun law invented by the Clinton's was found to be unconstitutional, then one one with a moving zone would be even more so.
Pat| 1.12.11 @ 6:51PM
A plexiglass shield around members of Congress - interesting. Come next election, the babies of America would certainly appreciate a plexiglass shield between their soft cheeks and some vote pandering politician's lips. And United Nutcases of America - take note of the proposed law requiring you to be unarmed within 1,000 feet of any politician, make a note of that in your diary -breaking this law would certainly have serious legal consequences after your next homicidal rampage.
Gruz| 1.12.11 @ 8:32PM
I don't know if this was suggested, but instead of us common folks keeping away from "them" keep them away from us.
faintfuzzy| 1.12.11 @ 9:11PM
I really like King's idea, just needs a slight realignment. Make the law read the the politicos have to stay at least 1000 yards away from any armed person...oh heck, make it 20 miles.
Wonder how long those idiots can tread water.
REB| 1.12.11 @ 10:50PM
Sure...some pot smoking ,satan worshiping lefty shoots up some people and the commie left blames the right,make perfect sense coming from these leftist retards!
I dont car much for Santorum,Ive talked to him a few times,but hes right,you already have a gulf between we the people and the so called servent rulers,any wider and hell will follow,besides Americans have not gotten violent towards these morons in any proportion to what they deserve(only communists,muslims and anarchists have so far) and the lefties had better hope to God they(the average American) dont(oh I forgot God doesnt believe in lefties...or was that the other way around....?)
Yosemeti Sam| 1.13.11 @ 12:09AM
" ... King wants a law forbidding anyone from being armed within 1,000 feet of any of the aforementioned federal officials...."
Anyone? Including Law enforcement officers?
Off hand, having witnessed Kings' rapier rejoinders to the likes of Leftoids - perhaps his
suggestion was tongue-in-cheek.
Right, King?
Right?
Chichilouise| 1.13.11 @ 10:34AM
If these congressmen and women want protection, give them guns and train them in their lawful use for self protection. Perhaps if they feel a bit of the fear that citizens do, they will do something about our court system that releases violent criminals, refuses to do something about known lunatics who have threatened the lives of others, and offers more rights to the murderers than to those who were slain by the animal just released from prison. Perhaps they have felt too protected, leaving it to us out here to defend ourselves againt the results of the leftist and liberal courts who think society is at fault for the actions of those who murder and steal from us. Let them feel the consequences of these loony policies. I know none of us would have wished this on any congressperson, but if they have to feel the consequences of their own ideas for a change, instead of shrieking and asking us to protect them, maybe they will wake up. After all, haven't the victims of violent crime been begging the government for redress and true protectionc for decades, only to watch them again blame all of us for the acts of the psychopaths? I say let them eat cake, and carry their own protection.
Arch| 1.13.11 @ 10:41AM
Suggest we spray paint all federal officials international orange, announce their schedules a month in advance and allow the citizens to protect their Second Amendment rights by establishing "Federal Official Free Zones," in which no official may travel, ever.
Richard Baker| 1.13.11 @ 11:13AM
Arch:
I congratulate you on a tremendously practical solution. May I add that someone with a red flag precede them similarly to the Red Flag Laws in the early days of automobiles?
Putney| 1.13.11 @ 9:44PM
Mr Cline oversimplified Rep. Shea-Porter's loss. She would have lost anyway in spite of the metal detectors.. But any casual reader of the Union Leader knows that he is fast on the opinions and lacking on the facts to back them up.
hugh BNYN | 1.13.11 @ 11:19PM
---Want to get to the bottom of things?
Have some fearless, unflinching press campaigns
leading a sustained campaign to wring Freemasonic control out of our system.
Even putting aside that Freemasonry IS, by any
definition not only a religion ---but, in its capstone, openly Luciferian.
Were this just a matter of bankers wearing robes
we might look the other way, but as we reckon
with the FACT that Freemason founded, operated and directed 'charitable' foundations have been,
not simply a 'parallel government' ----BUT have their fingerprints all over the illegal private
FED, our fiat currency, the Bolsheviks, Stalin,
Hitler, and, most chilling, the VAST 'peacetime'
genocides of Mao Tse Tung (CHECK OUT David Rockefeller's remarks to MAO).
FACT IS Freemasons dominate and control
law enforcement, the military, upper level governments around the world, the ENTIRE
NEA establishment ---and, through Rockefeller
founded front organization 'World Council of Churches' --almost the entire relgious establishment. ON record FACT.
NOT UNTIL the public is awakened and these
NGO's and foundations are opened, audited,
dismantled and their responsible dirrectors
tried for treason against the republic AND
crimes against humanity worldwide
----NOTHING will change...
Nathan Bickel | 1.13.11 @ 11:32PM
Mr. Cline,
Nice commentary. You hit upon one of the major things I mentioned in a recent blog entry of mine -- that being, that laws have unintended consequences:
"Legislation in light of the Tucson Shooting Massacre:"
http://freedomtorch.com/blogs/.....f-the-tucs
.........Perhaps, there should be a law enacted which makes it illegal for no airplane to be within 1000 feet of a public official? After all, didn't the 2 airplanes flying into the twin towers cause the tragedy of 911? Please excuse this author for being somewhat, sarcastic. But the reality remains, the alleged shooter did the nasty........These politicians propose laws without thinking of unintended consequences......Also, laws like this would have put in jeopardy (prosecution) some law-abiding (concealed gun permit) citizens, going to this Safeway, to shop, not being aware of a government official, holding a rally there..............
Osamas Pajamas| 1.14.11 @ 12:49AM
Here's a better idea. Let's ban all Federal officials within 1000 feet of any privately-owned weapons of self-defense. If we do our footwork right, we can waltz these Federale bxstxrds right into the sea without firin' a frkn shot!
Wayne Schaefer| 4.24.11 @ 3:00PM
In the case of this administration I believe this applies. When the people fear the Governmet, there is Tyrrany; When the Government fears the people , there is Liberty. Thomas jefferson
weddingdress | 7.1.11 @ 12:47AM
Carol Shea-Porter had 11 town halls, all in regular buildings, AFTER those in the federal buildings. The federal venues were entirely justified, as you know. People were afraid to come to those health care town halls because of the crazy language and behavior and the threatening. Shea-Porter was responsible for people's safety.
Thirteen town halls in one year is real access, by any yardstick. I would say that event have proved her right to be cautious!
Adidas | 8.11.11 @ 5:44AM
is good
العاب | 4.10.12 @ 12:54PM
Here is a thought thanx