Posted on 01/26/2023 8:31:49 AM PST by ChicagoConservative27
A group of first-term Democratic lawmakers is lobbying House leaders to hold a classified briefing from the FBI on mass shootings in the U.S. following recent massacres in California.
Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) sent a letter to both Republican and Democratic House leaders on Wednesday requesting the briefing from the FBI and other agencies.
HOUSE First-term Democrats urge Congress to hold classified briefing on mass shootings BY STEPHEN NEUKAM - 01/26/23 10:51 AM ET SHARE TWEET
Associated Press/CHC Bold PAC A group of first-term Democratic lawmakers is lobbying House leaders to hold a classified briefing from the FBI on mass shootings in the U.S. following recent massacres in California.
Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) sent a letter to both Republican and Democratic House leaders on Wednesday requesting the briefing from the FBI and other agencies.
The lawmakers said they “believe it is the responsibility of elected officials to confront the horrific reality that many of our constituents are forced to face, and to determine a common-sense path forward towards stopping the epidemic of mass shootings our country faces.”
“The devastating reality of gun violence in America makes it impossible to even process one mass shooting before another one is perpetuated,” the lawmakers wrote to Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).
“When these tragic events become so common, we risk becoming desensitized to the true horror of each one and the impact they have on the victims, their loved ones, and the community,” they added.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Why would a classified briefing be necessary? The DemocRATs think that there is a secret conspiracy behind the recent mass shootings?
Owww. Classified eh? That means copies of the minutes will be available in multiple locations. 🤡
A classified hearing could ask FBI how often it knows about mass shooters in advance
They want it to be a classified meeting because they’re afraid a Republican will bring photos of the mostly non-white mass shooters.
Why ‘classified’?.............should be open and on TV...............
How about doing the same for Fentanyl overdoses!! Many more die from this than mass shootings. And we could easily stop it without infringing on anyone’s rights.
because they want to vilify gun owners without the public hearing them do so-
Begs the question....who would be making these classified? Certainly not CIA or DIA, or NSA. Since all of the state organizations, and county police authority have no classification authority....that takes out 99-percent of the possibilities. So I’m left to the FBI or ATF? Why would they make it classified?
This sounds like some ‘kids’ who don’t know what they are doing.
“This will accomplish what exactly???”
Optics for the lefts continuous efforts to circumvent the constitution with fiats from unelected officials.
Meaning whatever they are told is hidden so they can leak what they want out of it.
Why a classified briefing? These events are broadcast on all the news channels.
I don’t think they understand what they are asking for or talking about
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
It would be too much to expect first-term Democrats to urge Biden to close the border.
Also, first-term Democrats, undoubtedly career Democrats too, need to be reminded that the Constitution's Article IV, Section 4 (4.4) requires the federal government to STAND DOWN to domestic violence in a state unless state government formally requests help with such violence.
"Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence [emphases added]."
Regarding Section 4, Justice Joseph Story had clarified that the drafters of the Constitution had made that section to help prevent the untrusted federal government from dreaming up any excuse to stick its big nose (my wording) into the affairs of the sovereign states.
”§ 1819. It may not be amiss further to observe, (in the language of another commentator,) that every pretext for intermeddling with the domestic concerns of any state, under colour of protecting it against domestic violence, is taken away by that part of the provision, which renders an application from the legislature, or executive authority of the state endangered necessary to be made to the general government, before its interference can be at all proper [emphasis added]. On the other hand, this article becomes an immense acquisition of strength, and additional force to the aid of any state government, in case of an internal rebellion, or insurrection against its authority. The southern states, being more peculiarly open to danger from this quarter, ought (he adds) to be particularly tenacious of a constitution, from which they may derive such assistance in the most critical periods.” —Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, Article 4, Section 4.
Finally, as a comparison with Democratic border policy-related deaths, does anybody know how many open-border-related fentanyl deaths have recently taken place in California?
You really need to read the highly suppressed 1982 Senate report on the RKBA. I have a paper copy from the US Government printing house. Below is an on line version. When you read it you will see why it is suppressed and now out of print.
https://guncite.com/journals/senrpt/senrpt.html
“The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half-century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner.”
19th century cases
16. * Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878).
“If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the (p.17)penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege.”
17. * Jennings v. State, 5 Tex. Crim. App. 298, at 300-01 (1878).
“We believe that portion of the act which provides that, in case of conviction, the defendant shall forfeit to the county the weapon or weapons so found on or about his person is not within the scope of legislative authority. * * * One of his most sacred rights is that of having arms for his own defence and that of the State. This right is one of the surest safeguards of liberty and self-preservation.”
18. * Andrews v. State, 50 Tenn. 165, 8 Am. Rep. 8, at 17 (1871).
“The passage from Story (Joseph Story: Comments on the Constitution) shows clearly that this right was intended, as we have maintained in this opinion, and was guaranteed to and to be exercised and enjoyed by the citizen as such, and not by him as a soldier, or in defense solely of his political rights.”
19. * Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846).
“’The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State.”
And the SCOTUS case that led to the Civil War..
Are Negros citizens...Dred Scott
“It would give to persons of the negro race, who are recognized as citizens in any one state of the Union, the right to enter every other state, whenever they pleased.... and it would give them full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might meet; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to KEEP AND CARRY ARMS wherever they went.”
Classified means it will allow the democrats to leak only what they want anyone to hear to the media.
Lefty heads would explode if we started quoting Dred on the Second Amendment.
Oh, I know...The part where refusal to enforce existing law contributes to the murders....CLASSIFIED!
The part were most murders are Black on Black, drug related, gang crime....CLASSIFIED!
The part were Biden's open border policy contributes to the increased murder rate...CLASSIFIED!
Nothing. I think the proper term is "grandstanding".
Hopefully they understand that the Democrats lost control of the House and no longer set the agenda.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.