Political opportunism and wrong-headed legislation is not restricted to the left:
Rep. Peter King, a Republican from New York, is planning to introduce legislation that would make it illegal to bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a government official, according to a person familiar with the congressman’s intentions.
Not only is this pathetic political opportunism, not only is it anti-second amendment, more than that…it’s just a stupid, stupid idea.
Does any sane person believe for even one moment that this law would have stopped Jared Loughner from penetrating that 1000′ gun-free perimeter and killing all of those people? If you’re planning on shooting a Congresswoman in the head and then emptying your magazine into the rest of the crowd, are you really worried that you’ll get charged with the felony of “carrying a gun within 1000′ of a government official” in addition to the capital murder charges you’re going to be hit with anyway?
Besides, I don’t think Congresscritters or other Government officials (other than the President of the United Sates) deserve any special protections not provided to average citizens. While Rep. Giffords’ shooting is horrific, far more innocent civilians are shot and murdered everyday…and none of them will be afforded greater protections under this law. All it does is further separate and isolate the political ruling class elites from those whom they are supposed to serve.
If Rep. King is really afraid, might I suggest that he could always give up the powers and privilege of office and resign?
But worse is the enforcement of this and the innocent, law-abiding gun owners who would/could be punished by this bullshit legislation.
1000′ is a pretty good distance. I’ll bet you in my life I’ve come within 1000′ of a US Congressman on more than one occasion without having known it. The number of “government officials” I’ve unknowingly been within that distance from is too numerous to even count.
What happens if I’m sitting at sidewalk cafe with a cup of coffee, a deli sandwich, and my .45 ACP legally concealed in the small of my back…and a US Congressperson comes within 1000′ of me? Did I just commit a felony?
If Congress critters really wanted to feel safer in public, they should be encouraging responsible CHL holders to attend all of their public appearances. The 1000′ law isn’t going to stop a crazy, twisted, evil person intent on shooting a Congresswoman or Senator from doing so. However, it will prevent law-abiding and responsible CHL holders from being close by to save their asses — when the police might take 10 minutes or more to show up, as they did in Tuscon.
_______
MORE from The Washington Examiner:
King’s law is classic political idiocy of the worst sort: legislation timed to exploit outrage while doing nothing to solve a problem. If passed into law, it would disarm the law-abiding citizen, turn your average hunter into a criminal if they wandered into the wrong parking lot, and provide no barrier whatsoever to would-be assassins.
Email This Post
⋅
Print This Post
Pete King should know better than this. Even the Secret Service says if a crazy wants to get to some one, it’s hard to prevent them if they are determined to.
All that can be done is to discourage acts by their show of presents.
One of the law abiding citizens who helped subdue the shooter was carrying concealed at the time. He stopped by the Walgreens to get some smokes, and didn’t even know what was going on. Under this proposed legislation, he would have been arrested as well. Jared Loughner had a history of drug abuse. He already committed a felony shen he purchased the firearm by lying on the ATF form.
If this passes, instead of having armed citizens as a force multiplier against deadly attacks, it will be a force reduction, guaranteeing no armed citizen will be available to intervene.
Brilliant move, if his intention is to then follow up with a large security staff for each and every appearance of an official.
Even the libturds at FireDogLake (and few Lefty sites have bigger turds than FDL) think this is a very bad, stupid idea that is more about the appearance of security than it is about actual security.
Hmmm….thanks for the link, but I will take your word for it.
I don’t need those coodies.
What always amazes me is how one sensational event causes so many to become so nutty, instead of clinching their glutes, setting their jaws and facing the latest adversity with cold logic.