Washington, D.C., Mayor Fenty Is Correct: Compromise on Guns to Get the Vote

heh..

nice, really nice!

Gun Rights are a Civil Right.

If the residents of Washington D.C. keep electing people that deny them a basic civil right that must be what they want.

If they think that they and their fellow citizens are not responsible enough, nor can be trusted with a basic right ,... it raises a question.

What other basic rights should they be denied ?

" those that would give up liberty for safety deserve niether"

Lets see, he will give in on an illegal stance on the 2nd to get an unconstitutional vote?

Well you idiots elected him! As stated in the Heller decision gun bans are unconstitutional and so is voting rights to a group that already has voting rights in individual states. Give us a break!

The Only Outrage is the Flagrant Violation of the Constitution

D.C. is NOT a State and is NOT entitled to Representation in Congress...the Constitution prohibits representation by NON-States. IF DC wants a seat in the House and a seat in the Senate, then they will either have to become a State OR they will have to belong to a State.

The fact that so many Journalists and Politicians ignore the Constitution and/or are in complete ignorance about it, and then go bandying about trying to make fundamental changes which violate the Constitution...that is the REAL Outrage.

Tell you what Mr. Schlessinger...READ the entire Document and learn it, before you go spouting off about fundamental changes.

Washington, D.C., Mayor Fenty Is Correct: Compromise on Guns to Get the Vote

Funny, I thought the Second Amendment was also a fundemental right. If you can deny DC one, why not others? DC has continuely denied its citizens the fundemental right under the Second Amendment so what makes you think they deserve a right to vote?

Outrage???

The outrage is that the D.C. government has been in violation of it citizens' 2A rights for over 30 years!!! Even after last summers Heller decision, the city ouncil immediately passed new restrictions that continue to deprive citizens rights, SCOTUS be damned! Now THAT is outrageous.

Its very debatable whether its even constitutional for DC to get a seat in congress.

Bad deal

Even if the DC voting law is upheld, it's just a law, and can (and will, I assure you) be repealed the next moment the Republicans can manage it.

It wasn't a good idea to start, now it is a REALLY bad one. Why concede anything for something that can and will be taken away later?

A clean voting right, unencumbered, belongs to DC anyway ... that is the meaning of inalienable (innate, inherent, intrinsic). It exists, it cannot be sold, traded, bartered, or taken away.

If America refuses to recognize and respect that inalienable right, or suppresses its expression, in diminishes America's stature, and calls into question the very legitimacy of the governance over DC, imposed without Consent of the Governed.

You are right

Again, the Council can fix this, retaining control of gun rules if they undo some of their past knee jerk regulations. But they are unlikely to do that. I hold them responsible.

Brian

You are totally ignoring the fact that the seat in congress is unconstitutional and would be struck down. So D.C. would have no vote and then no gun control. It's called a lose lose situation.

Proposals either have merit or they don't

Bartering and trading unrelated matters into "deals" is the stuff of bad government.