Skip to comments.Pete King bill would ban guns within 1,000 feet of lawmakers
Posted on 01/11/2011 10:16:18 AM PST by Redcloak
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), one of the few pro-gun control Republicans in the House, wants to make it illegal for someone to carry a gun within 1,000 feet of certain high-ranking federal officials, including members of Congress.
It is imperative that we do all that we can to give law enforcement the tools they need to ensure the safety of New Yorkers and prevent an attack before it happens, said King, who is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, during a press conference in New York.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
You could have two guys carry a 1000' chain attached to two poles. When there's any question about the distance between the politician and the gunman somebody could blow a whistle and say, "Bring out the chains!"
Less than 100'.
Does anyone truly believe that the commission of one more crime would have deterred this lunatic? When you’ve decided to commit a crime that carries the death penalty, how can the effectiveness of creating another offense even be argued with a straight face?
Correction. Less than 300’.
So ... if I have a concealed carry license, and am legally carrying while driving my car, and a Congressman drives past me in the next lane — I’m a felon? How are legal carriers supposed to keep track of the exact location of legislators so as to know when one is venturing too close?
So Kennedy’s life would have been SAVED!
A GUN FREE ZONE...
In my view it’s because on a majority, Republicans who vote pro-gun are able to be counted on more often than Democrats who vote pro-gun.
Take for instance the USSC justices who were seated in the last 2 years. If we had more Republicans it stands to reason that we might have had more of a voice and possibly a choice in who was selected and seated.
The NRA assisted a good number of, so called, pro-gun Democrats in the last election. They gave their support to these Dems simply because of their gun votes and the fact they were incumbents, but failed to take into consideration how the Dems (pro-gun or not) would help Obama get the USSC justices he wanted without any problems or questions.
Two of the most anti-gun judges to ever sit on the USSC. So how helpful were the pro-gun Dems in helping Obama get two very anti-gun judges seated?
To me that begs the question, why should I pay the NRA to help out pro-gun Dems who will help seat the most anti-gun judges and defeat our cause?
Just imagine that if he had one more judge on the anti-gun side we would have lost the case of Heller vs. DC and the case in Chicago. The USSC would have said that the 2nd Amendment wasn’t intended for individuals and we would be even more in trouble than we are now. Just 1 vote kept those things from working against us. And the NRA helped the anti-gunners by throwing their support behind so called pro-gun Dems.
I think it makes more sense to ban politicians within 1000 feet of a gun.
Yep. This would be in direct violation of the 2nd. Amendment... like at the other nanny state gun laws.
so if a “do you know who i am” politician steps into a restaurant or store, all law abiding citizens must leave?
Wouldn’t it be a better deterrent to let it be known that all Congressmen and women will be trained in the use of personal weapons, will have a CCW permit issued to them, and may or may not be carrying a handgun for personal protection?
Get over yourself, King. I dont know of anyone that has the protection the President or those around him have. As for Congress, most of the population dont recognize most of the names in Congress; much less the people.
In other words; leave it alone.
Along with kissing Bildo Klintoon's tuckus at every opportunity including voting against Impeachment.
Yes, this is how they zone out certain businesses in NYC....1000 feet away from any school, bar, church/synagogue, hospital covers damn near all of the city....
As soon as those same high ranking officials are required to have a 1000 ft perimeter of signs announcing that they are present.
Would this be the death knell for all the gangs in DC?
How could anyone know where all lawmakers are all of the time?
Dick Cheney could not go hunting with his friends!!!!!
John Kerry could not pretend to be a hunter!!!!
I never said they should.
you’re making sense.
Doubt he will see the relationship though.....
Don't know how a guy that actually seems to get it..on many fronts..can't get this.
I guess some are just more equal than others.
Still can possess in school zone if :
An individual who has been issued a right-to-carry license by the state, or a political subdivision of the state, in which the “school zone” is located may continue to carry in a “school zone” in compliance with existing state and local laws. Non-licensed individuals who drive through a “school zone” must have their firearms unloaded and locked in a container or firearms rack.
Oh, but I have seen that argument presented here. I remember several threads where GOP loyalists complained that the NRA was endorsing a pro-gun Democrat over their candidate. They never could explain why the NRA should sell out gun owners over non-RKBA causes.
From what I read in another article, the reason the Army denied him enlistment was because he used marijuana too many times.
Connecting at 1,000 feet, 333 yards does not require snipers or even a high grade rifle.
What happens if they visit a military base??
I'd like to propose a bill banning congresscritters within 10,000 ft. of any reporter, news camera or microphone.
An American Citizen
Issue Nerf guns?
And that's the kind of thinking that gets filed with the "if you don't like having naked pics taken of your children, then don't fly". Just keep bleating while they continue to chip away at rights that used be protected by our Constitution.
I have to disagree with that analogy.
While I think every law abiding citizen should be carrying if they so choose.There are places that even with a CHL you cannot carry. Would you really want to be sitting in a soccer stadium with half the people packing.Certain places are breeding grounds for trouble, such as a court house. Things happen in a courthouse for example, that could tend to make an otherwise normal person flip out. I don't think you would want a father or mother sitting in the courtroom when a not guilty verdict came in on the scumbag that murdered their child.
There have to be some limits, there are places that law enforcement officers cannot carry.
With that said, if you goofey azz politicians don't want anyone around you with firearms, I have no problem with that either. But the burden is on you to stay away from any place where the carrying of weapons is legal, and there will be no adding to the list of restricted places. If it was legal before last Saturday, then it is too late to change it.
I would rather they stay 1000ft away from me anyways, I'd need a flea dip if they got any closer.
Hi Tim? Can you give me your schedule so I know where not to carry? I should ask for the Dingell and Rogers schedules too since their districts are less than five miles from me.
Good question. So if you are sitting someplace minding your own business and you have a weapon and some lawmaker wanders within the 1000 foot circle you should have drawn as a warning, you are the one in violation? Okay, that’s just stupid. But judging from many in office, I guess I understand where these idiots come from. I guess? Or not. Now I’m confusing myself.
One thousand feet. So, someone driving down the street, two blocks over, with no idea in the world that some tin-horn, two-bit congresscritter is in the vicinity would be GUILTY of a federal crime.
I thought I like Peter King, but I guess not. Looser.
I do work in Brighton. It's the hometown of Mike Rogers, a congressman. If I'm going into town, there's a possibility I'll run into Rogers without knowing he'll be there. I'll be breaking the law and not know it. Felony.
If I get a felony, I lose my job and license.
Wow! It's so simple when you put it that way. Why didn't anyone think of it before?
I can just see the enforcement...
“Lawmaker in the open and moving ... search the peasantry.”
How many teenage black males living in government subsidized housing have been shot in the same time frame?
Somehow, I think it would be more appropriate to limit gun possession within 1,000 feet of the young black male! Oh, wait a minute, that would mean stopping and searching everyone in the inner city - RACIST.
Why does Rep King think he is so much more important than the black kid who is under the direct influence and protection of the federal government?
Good point. Let's make it 5000 feet.
I suppose that leaves only one logical alternative: Ban all citizens from coming within 1000’ of a lawmaker. (That was probably King’s first idea, but it would be a tough sell.)
Kind of like the alternative methods they use to criminalize smoking. (but, oh, we’ll make an exception for that one.)
“If I get a felony, I lose my job and license.”
“There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers.”
Quote by: Ayn Rand
Source: “Atlas Shrugged”, Part II, Chapter 3
MAKE WAY! MAKE WAY! MAKE WAY FOR THE ONE WHO COMES! ON THY KNEES SERFS! LOOK NOT UPON THY MASTERS UPON PAIN OF DEATH! MAKE WAY FOR HE WHO COMES!
I have that book. And if I’m dinged with a felony where I lose my life, job, and family, I’m not going Galt. I’m going Henry Bowman.
They are all pussies.
If you’re planning on “going Bowman”,
make sure you get the identity of the offending officials before you drop out.
Harder to do AFTER.