Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

theHandpuppet

(19,964 posts)
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 08:05 AM Jul 2014

Just another example of why D.C. MUST have statehood!

Why is a Kentucky congressman spending so much time and effort to gut D.C.'s gun control laws? What business is it of his? Is there no business in Kentucky that needs attending? As an Appalachian myself, I can attest that the congressman would do well to serve the people of his home state who actually need some decent representation.

This is just the latest example of why D.C. must have statehood!

Will be cross posting this to Kentucky group. Note, though the subject of the Congressman's bill is D.C.'s gun laws, this is presented as only the latest example of absurdity regarding Congressional interference with the District's business.

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2014/07/16/kentucky-republican-thomas-massie-keeps-pushing-to-gut-d-c-s-gun-laws/
Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie Keeps Pushing to Gut D.C.’s Gun Laws
Jul. 16, 2014 at 4:51 pm

It took him two attempts, but this morning a Republican House member from Kentucky got what he wanted and successfully attached an amendment that would gut D.C.'s gun laws to a $21.3 billion spending bill.

Rep. Thomas Massie's amendment to the financial services and general government appropriations bill states that the District government is prohibited from spending any of its money on enforcing its own gun laws. Local officials would only be allowed to enforce federal gun laws. The amendment was approved on a voice vote.

Last night, Massie tried to introduce a similar amendment, but it was rejected on the basis that it violated rules by changing existing law through a spending bill. Today, he revised the bill slightly to reflect that he was not trying to change D.C. law, but simply saying the city can not spend any of its money enforcing its gun laws, which would effectively void current law.

Here's the wording of yesterday's amendment:

None of the funds made available by this Act, including amounts made available under titles IV or VIII, may be used by any authority of the government of the District of Columbia to prohibit the ability of any person to possess, acquire, use, sell or transport a firearm except to the extent such activity is prohibited by Federal law.... MORE

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Just another example of why D.C. MUST have statehood! (Original Post) theHandpuppet Jul 2014 OP
"Taxation without representation is tyranny!" thucythucy Jul 2014 #1

thucythucy

(8,035 posts)
1. "Taxation without representation is tyranny!"
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 10:25 AM
Jul 2014

was a big-deal slogan of the American revolution.

Yet, residents of DC pay federal taxes, and have no senators, and no voting representatives.

AND, last time I checked, DC had a population larger than Wyoming.

Statehood for DC is long overdue.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»District of Columbia»Just another example of w...