National Politics - 2016

Rand Paul Seeks Repeal Of DC Anti-Gun Laws

GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WANTS TO BOLSTER SECOND AMENDMENT FREEDOM IN OUR NATION’S CAPITAL U.S. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky has introduced legislation that would revoke Washington, D.C.’s invasive firearm restrictions.  Paul’s bill – the “Defend Our Capital Act of 2015″- was introduced as an amendment to a health care bill….


U.S. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky has introduced legislation that would revoke Washington, D.C.’s invasive firearm restrictions.  Paul’s bill – the “Defend Our Capital Act of 2015″- was introduced as an amendment to a health care bill.

The legislation would “remove existing restrictive firearm ownership laws in the District of Columbia,” while also requiring the district “to issue and grant reciprocity for concealed weapons permits for both residents and non-residents.”

“For too long the Americans who live in and visit their nation’s capital have been prevented from defending themselves and their loved ones,” Paul said.  “No longer should our citizens have to choose between safety or visiting Washington, D.C.”

We concur.

Washington D.C. banned firearms in the mid-1970s but that regulation was struck down in 2008 by the U.S. Supreme Court.  Earlier this year, a federal appellate court struck down additional components of the district’s anti-Second Amendment laws – including a limit on the number of guns residents could legally own.

This website has been sharply critical of Paul’s presidential campaign – and with good reason.  He had a chance (the best chance of anyone, actually) to be a credible anti-establishment candidate – but he chose to compromise his principles and pander to GOP leaders instead.

The result?  According to the latest aggregate national polling compiled by Real Clear Politics, Paul is garnering the support of a paltry 2.3 percent of GOP primary voters nationally.  That’s obviously well below his high-water mark of 17 percent back in December of 2013.

Paul isn’t the first GOP candidate to trumpet his pro-gun bona fides.  U.S. Senator Ted Cruz has touted his endorsement by a national gun group, while GOP frontrunner Donald Trump made strengthening the Second Amendment one of his first policy forays.


Related posts

National Politics - 2016

Donald Trump Outworked Hillary Clinton

National Politics - 2016


National Politics - 2016

Only 1,400 Sign SC Democratic “Elector Petition”



Werry Tard December 3, 2015 at 6:15 pm

Can anyone in the GOP do ANYTHING besides useless, time and money wasting grandstanding that’ll go nowhere? Seriously?

Your Average Republican December 3, 2015 at 6:21 pm

What would you prefer? 27th Benghazi hearing? 912th attempt to repeal ObamaCare? 483rd heavily edited video to generate fake controversy?

Werry Tard December 3, 2015 at 6:24 pm

At least the edited videos accomplished something….
Spurring a radicalized christian to murder a cop, a mother and a veteran while attacking a Planned Parenthood.

Bible Thumper December 3, 2015 at 9:02 pm

You seem to know what’s going on arround here. Could you tell me who to see if I want to get paid to post comments? How much does ir pay? Do I get paid only for a particular viewpoint? Is good spelling, punctuation or logical reasoning necessary?

flip December 3, 2015 at 10:23 pm

You’d have to ask Terry Ward or pogo.

Rocky Verdad December 4, 2015 at 9:45 am

Here we go again.

GrandTerry December 4, 2015 at 7:46 am

I know a guy, who knows a guy…

GrandTerryAutoAsphyxiation December 4, 2015 at 6:08 pm

You referring to me?

erneba December 3, 2015 at 6:58 pm

If a few more incidents like the tragedy at San Bernardino occurs in the neat future, Rand Paul or any other Congressperson would have no problem getting a bill passed.
People in this country are getting edgy about the presence of people in this country that are committed to a religious doctrine that calls for your annihilation. The upcoming immigration of refugees from the Middle East has people on edge that some of these people may not be the “innocent” refugees that the administration has promised to “vet.” (chuckle, chuckle).
As the recent Incident in San Barnardino revealed, gun free zones, the local police, background checks, and unlimited rhetoric from the oval office will not protect you. You and you alone are responsible for your own well-being…protect it, the Constitution ensures you of that right. And don’t become a statistic to what Obama deems “workplace violence.”
The world is changing before our eyes, take care of yourself.

Good Guy With A Gun December 3, 2015 at 7:07 pm

I’m never around to save the day, but if I was, these guys would just go back to suicide bombings. Can’t draw a gun faster than a terrorist can push a concealed button.

erneba December 3, 2015 at 7:21 pm

Depending upon the situation, in some cases,you are probably correct. But if you are some place where you have adequate time and opportunity to defend yourself, such as a mall, parking lot, in your home, it would be worth a shot. And yes, bombs are are different deal, in some cases, all you can do is bend over and kiss your ass goodbye.
But, don’t give up without a fight.

shifty henry December 3, 2015 at 7:39 pm

again, 1,000 +

CorruptionInColumbia December 4, 2015 at 1:51 am

Looks like you were here to fix this problem.

CorruptionInColumbia December 4, 2015 at 1:58 am Reply
CorruptionInColumbia December 4, 2015 at 2:08 am

… and this one. Note to all who think that CWP’s are only used by racist old white people, this one shows a young Black man, apparently a good citizen, handing a racist white POS his ass in a rightful self-defense shooting. Another version of this story I saw elsewhere quoted a cop involved with the case as noting the tremendous restraint the armed citizen showed in not shooting the first POS who sucker-punched him.

CorruptionInColumbia December 4, 2015 at 2:09 am
CorruptionOnColumbia December 4, 2015 at 2:15 am

…and it looks as if you were here, too!

Do you need more? There are more where these came from.

erneba December 4, 2015 at 8:15 am

Good points.

Tazmaniac December 4, 2015 at 9:39 am

You know that is what gets buried in all the bullshit. The 2nd is for every law abiding free man and woman of any color or religion. What Liberals always try to cover like cat shit is that the majority of these shootings are by people who were never legally able to possess a firearm. The laws are and have been there so when idiots like “good guy” open their mouths for more laws they are throwing a canard.

Good Guy With A Gun December 4, 2015 at 7:41 am

But I’m still present for fewer than 1% of shootings. I’ll never be a reliable superhero…

CorruptionInColumbia December 4, 2015 at 11:17 am

You neglect to include, likely uncountable but numerous, instances where a gun might be shown and never fired. In a related category and more uncountable, crimes that are discouraged because an intended victim is giving off shitty vibes to the perp who was observing them and they might better leave this one alone. I have been the intended victim in one of each. I didn’t have anything concrete to report (meaning neither had yet escalated to an arrestable action) but I have less thsn zero doubt as to how things were stacking with regard to the other party’s intentions towards me.

Also, for the good citizens whose hides were saved in these instances, their families, and their friends, the percentages were not important. What was inportant is that their loved ones and friends get to spend a little more time on this plane with them.

Nothing to see here December 4, 2015 at 2:50 pm

These mass shootings are all just false flag hoaxes, so why do we need more guns to protect us from imaginary gunmen or terrorists?

Zeb December 3, 2015 at 7:17 pm

Yes, people are getting edgy over violent religious zealot immigrants from SC coming to CO to commit terroristic acts. No doubt about that!

erneba December 3, 2015 at 7:18 pm

Yeah, they need to protect themselves, and rarely does bitching help.

Oh, please December 3, 2015 at 8:07 pm

Nobody is trying to hurt you.
Nobody cares…

erneba December 3, 2015 at 8:11 pm

Tell that to the folks at the San Bernardino luncheon.
I can not think of a more innocent group of people that was suspecting no harm.

Oh, please December 3, 2015 at 8:29 pm

Apparently, You sit at home all day on the computer commenting on FitsNews.
Those people left their homes.
You’re safe.

erneba December 3, 2015 at 9:25 pm

No, I get out everyday, and rarely encounter assholes like you.

J.Smith December 3, 2015 at 9:28 pm

They don’t get it, do they? The world has changed.Liberals are a dangerous breed.

erneba December 3, 2015 at 9:30 pm

Oh, they have brought in ti the company line, it is so predictable and boring. I have not heard anything new out them in decades.

J.Smith December 3, 2015 at 9:37 pm

lol…they still stuck in Mondaleville with a SPICE of ObamaIslam. :)

erneba December 3, 2015 at 9:43 pm

“Mondale. I have not heard a reference to him in years. One of those forgettable characters, I was having trouble accurately depicting a mental image of him.
Remembering back, he would probably be considered a genius compared to today’s batch of Democrats.

J.Smith December 3, 2015 at 9:50 pm

He won ONE state in 1984 against Reagan-Minnesota. Ain’t it fitting that is where 99% of the radical Islamic terrorists are coming from in 2015?

Gotta love the democrat party….

erneba December 3, 2015 at 9:56 pm

Yes, Minneapolis has a large Muslim community. Bet they freeze their asses off up there. How did that many of them congregate so far North, in lily white Minnesota?

Tazmaniac December 4, 2015 at 9:25 am

Put there by the Clintons. Try to guess their welfare and crime rates. The largest population center of Somalis in the world is in good ole’ Minnesota.

SC, terrorist breeding ground December 3, 2015 at 10:31 pm

Why does SC create christian terrorists like Dylan Roof and Richard Dear?
Reading these comments answers that question…

erneba December 4, 2015 at 5:01 am

If that is the conclusion you draw, then you are a misguided person.
If you people showed any sense of reality, people might respect your opinion. Jumping straight to the conclusion that respecting and abiding by the the Second Amendment breeds terrorism shows that you do not respect the Constitution and are not prepared to discuss the topic.
People with mental illnesses should not be allowed to purchase and carry firearms. We can not let the less common denominator in our society establish our Constitutional standards.

J. Smith December 4, 2015 at 7:40 am

Some of us terrorists live in Ohio. LMAO!!!!!!

Damn! December 4, 2015 at 7:39 am


Birthers For Cruz December 4, 2015 at 7:46 am

Based on your ramblings here?

The major concern is you shooting yourself in the foot.

Talkin' Bout Erneba December 4, 2015 at 7:48 am

The downside to universal health care is that the weakest links are less likely to remove themselves from the gene pool.

erneba December 4, 2015 at 8:23 am

Yeah and I bet you have a large family of dopes.

erneba December 4, 2015 at 8:18 am

Unlike you, I did not suffer a mortal wound to the brain.

shifty henry December 3, 2015 at 7:38 pm

1,000 +

Washington Post December 4, 2015 at 9:04 am Reply
Nölff December 4, 2015 at 9:19 am

Breitbart is about as accurate as Weekly World News. It’s nothing but political spin for Drudgetards.

Cornhead December 4, 2015 at 11:11 am

The article is from the Washington Post and Mother Jones stats are cited.

Fecal Matters December 4, 2015 at 11:40 am

You trust Mother Jones, don’tcha?

Fr0ntSight December 4, 2015 at 1:08 pm

I wish we could take care of ourselves. Unfortunately we gave that right up and now depend on the gov to take care of us.

living life December 4, 2015 at 1:57 pm

Are there any Muslims in Chesterfield county? I know there is a community of them in York county that folks freak out about constantly. They’ve been there a couple of decades and law enforcement has consistently assured the public nothing nefarious is going on with them.
I decided after sitting in a movie theatre, worrying about the lone fat guy sitting in the back by himself without a tub of popcorn or drink – that it was ridiculous and unpleasant to live life that way. Better for me to mentally note exits when I’m out in public and go on with my activities, than being on constant alert for a mass murderer. The odds are I’ll die from an illness or accident than a crime.

Weezl December 3, 2015 at 9:12 pm

Will, you are a complete and utter jackass along with Ron Paul. Why do you think the restrictions on possessing fire arms was enacted in the first place? … was in response to soaring crime rates, specifically murders and armed robberies, the rates of which equals or exceeds the homicide and overall crime rates currently seen in Chicago.

I lived and worked in DC during that period and the anti gun legislation was wholly supported and endorsed by the Mayor and City Council as well as an overwhelming majority of the District residents.

Your so called libertarian views on this subject is misguided, uninformed and simply wrong. The rampant loss of lives due to gun violence and the resulting attempts at some form of limited gun control is not an abridgment of the second amendment right to bear arms but rather an attempt to keep guns out of the wrong hands.

I hope you are proud of your self as you cash that NRA check, you pathetic worthless scumbag.

CorruptionInColumbia December 4, 2015 at 1:36 am

Things are so much safer (for criminals) when everyone else is disarmed. Police are not and can not be everywhere, all the time. In a free society, I don’t think we would really want them to be. Any citizen of sound mind should be unrestricted in possessing the means to protect themselves from criminal attack.

I remember my father having to travel to DC on business in the mid-70’s. An old friend of the family’s and hunting buddy of my grandfather and father was working as a bodyguard for a Congressman at the time. Dad couldn’t be legally armed up there but his friend, because of who he worked for, had a rare and coveted DC carry permit. As I recall, Charles carried the 6.5″ barrel S&W Model 29 (Dirty Harry’s gun) as his weapon of choice. Dad said that since he couldn’t be armed, it was a comfort that Charles was and was nice enough to give him the grand tour of DC at the time.

Weezl December 4, 2015 at 8:43 am

After the anti gun legislation was enacted and enforced, the overall crime rates (including homicide, armed robbery,assault, rape, etc.) dropped significantly. That was no accident. As a resident of the District, I greatly appreciated this fact and the job done by the Metropolitan Police Department.

Your tired old NRA diatribe/talking point “outlaw guns and only criminals will have guns” is plain wrong and ignores the fact that sensibly crafted gun control laws that severely restrict the ability of those who should not have guns from getting them. Unfortunately, despite the rising number of gun related deaths in this country, you gun nuts/zealots see any attempts at gun control as an attempt to infringe on your second amendment rights.

Finally, your purported, self serving story about your dear Dad’s visit to DC and his need for an armed escort illustrate my point exactly; that is, he (Dad) did not feel safe visiting and exploring DC due to the rampant crime and violence which, if true makes you a hypocrite.

Daniel Boome December 4, 2015 at 10:06 am

I know you anti-gun people hate the aforementioned “outlaw guns and only criminals will have guns” argument (it’s not a “diatribe”), but your idealistic notion that “sensibly crafted gun control laws that severely restrict the ability of those who should not have guns from getting them” is pure fantasy. You have no idea what a “sensibly crafted” law would even entail. That’s just a buzz-phrase that anti-gun people use. So is the unsubstantiated claim that there is a “rising number of gun related deaths in this country”. How about breaking it down jurisdiction by jurisdiction and comparing crime rates before and after? If you actually did that, it wouldn’t fit your narrative about some broad generalization of skyrocketing deaths and lack of gun control as the culprit. When it comes to DC, 1976 saw the banning of new handguns and required guns at home to be stored and dissembled or locked up. Homicides rose to 369 in 1988, from 188 in 1976 when the ban started. By 1993, annual homicides were 454. Although murder rates started declining in 1994 (18 years post-ban) the gun ban was struck down, starting in 2008, and murders in DC have steadily gone down, from 186 in 2008 to 88 in 2012, the lowest number since the law was enacted in 1976. DC still has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation. Despite this, the gun murder rate remains dramatically high, the highest in the United States in fact. It always has been, regardless of gun laws, so to link violent crime to guns in any way is to ignore what may be the real problems. Yet you want to blame the NRA and “gun nuts/zealots” for disseminating false info? Evidence may be coming out that the San Bernadino shooters possessed illegal automatic weapons that may have possibly been smuggled in illegally. I don’t know, but if that were the case, what sort of anti-gun legislation would you propose to stop that?

CorruptionInColumbia December 4, 2015 at 11:39 am

Daniel covered the bases pretty well but I’ll add one thing. While we had crime and violence down here, as does anywhere, during that time, we had nowhere near the level of crime and violence of DC. Dad always had a gun in the glove box with him in those days and as he was a reserve deputy in our county, might have had one on him if he felt the need. Going to places like DC or NYC, where good guys were forbidden to possess firearms yet criminals regularly had them (and still do), he was uneasy. There is nothing hypocritical about that. I believe it is called common sense.

Nölff December 4, 2015 at 8:05 am

Anytime a mass shooting occurs; NRA politicizes it, politicians put the blame on Obama like he did it himself and nonstop regurgitated phrases come off the assembly line like: “If those people in the hospital had guns, none of this would have happened.”

Daniel Boome December 4, 2015 at 9:33 am

And Obama immediately mentioning the need for more gun control in the aftermath is not politicizing it, right? Yeah, about that: The difference is that those calling for the arming of the citizenry are proposing something that may have helped saved lives. Obama is using a “regurgitated phrases” regarding gun control that, if implemented, would do absolutely nothing to save lives. I’m not defending people immediately jumping into the “those people should have been armed”, because I don’t think that’s necessarily appropriate and it becomes redundant. However, that’s far more defensible than the left immediately jumping onto the issue as an opportunity to push control.

CorruptionInColumbia December 4, 2015 at 11:24 am

Why is it that every time something like this happens, Obama et al’s “solution” is to deprive the people who DIDN’T do it of firearms?

Derp December 4, 2015 at 2:52 pm

Actually, the response is to purchase more guns. So the NRA must be behind all of these mass shootings.

erneba December 4, 2015 at 3:14 pm

“…NRA politicizes it, politicians put the blame on Obama…”

You are stupidly delusional.

NRA response December 4, 2015 at 5:11 pm

“And the fact remains that California has already adoptedPresident Obama’s gun control wish list:
“universal” background checks, registration, waiting periods, gun
bans, magazine bans and an expansion of prohibited gun categories. But
those laws did nothing to prevent this horrific crime from taking place.

tomstickler December 4, 2015 at 3:23 pm

Just in case anyone wonders what happened to Rand’s amendment:

idiotwind December 7, 2015 at 9:23 am

the war on drugs will work if we keep at it another 50 years. also, our refusal to talk with cuba is bringing that country’s administration to its knees. just give it more geological time. and the strategy of ‘more guns’ will prove correct – as all the non-gun-slinging countries of the world will eventually admit. just give it more time. also jesus is coming back any day now. all these thoughts have the same people in common. and most of them live in the south. why is that?


Leave a Comment