Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah) and Heath Schuler (D., N.C.) have announced that they will begin carrying guns when they are in their home districts. Both lawmakers already have conceal to carry permits.
“You never think something like this will happen, but then it does,” Shuler told Politico. “After the elections, I let my guard down. Now I know I need to have [my gun] on me. We’re going to need to do a much better job of with security at these events.”
Chaffetz also is looking into requiring U.S. Marshalls to attend district events to guard lawmakers.
Normally, I'm not a fan of reflexive legislative actions in the immediate aftermath of events like this. BUT, I think that it's only prudent to have at least a minimal law enforcement presence at these kinds of events back in the Congressmen's home districts. As this event tragically illustrates, not only do we need to ensure the safety of our elected representatives, but there's the public's safety to account for as well.
If that "presence" is the US Marshall service, that's fine with me. However, a more cost-effective measure might be to issue federal reimbursement to local law enforcement agency to cover the ad hoc costs of these kinds of events.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMy opinion of Chaffetz (already pretty high) and Shuler (Dem though he may be) just went up several notches. (To be clear: that's for the "start carrying" part of this, not the requiring U.S. marshalls part.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt may be a good idea to have more security, but I don't agree about putting the US Marshall service on this.
Congresspeople are citizens of their districts. If he/she wants security at an event, then the district can provide it for their congressperson. This isn't some massive new expense and it's entirely appropriate to be handled locally.
Put the feds on this and this becomes slippery slope fast. You've got 535 congresspeople - this is a big effort. Why stop at public events in their district? How about every day of their lives when they want it? After all, a madman can strike anywhere, perhaps most especially when they're alone. How about overseas trips? What about their families and key aides?
How about judges? A federal judge was just murdered after all.
Go down this road and you could end up with a class of people even more out of touch.
If armed US marshalls were stationed by congresspeople, what effect would that have had on the town hall meetings the past couple of years?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI still think that Archie Bunker had the best solution for terrorists (link to solution below).
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's a nice thought, but basically it's not so much "I'm competent to take control of my own destiny" as much as "I need to say something pointless to assure myself that this won't happen to me".
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe smarter ones realize that having your own pistol, concealed and holstered, is almost always useless as protection against an assassin - even against a robbery or assault.
It's also not going to frighten another Loughner, who had not planned as far along as "OK, they're dead - now what?".
Hurray for the two reps’ willingness to protect themselves.
This need not be a federal concern, but rather one those closest to the ground can judge. Let the local constables provide assistance as required.
We do want to be quite careful about further insulating / isolating public officials from the public.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJust as always, there will be a lot of bad legislation proposed in response to this terrible event, but these two may have hit on something. What about a law allowing members of Congress and judges to carry concealed weapons thoughout the country? While they may not be able to respond to an murder attempt by shooting back, it may deter future copycats and nutcases. Also, unlike having them accompanied by a praetorian guard of US Marshalls, it won't cost the tax payer a dime.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Adamsmith:
Why not allow anyone with a concealed carry permit to carry one from coast to coast? The people I know who have them tend to be more on the straight and narrow than most members of Congress.
@panic: Obviously not familiar with the numerous uses of weapons in self-defense that occur all over the country, are you? The NRA provides a brief run-down of the more notable occasions every month, and yes, they often involve a draw from concealment against a drawn weapon.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse_this from Panic....
"having your own pistol, concealed and holstered, is almost always useless as protection against an assassin - even against a robbery or assault."
is not true.
Doesn't the Secret Service carry their weapons 'concealed and holstered' ? are these weapons useless?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRep.Schuler has a C rating from GOA,so he's not pro-gun.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIMO,a bit hypocritical to be wanting to carry a firearm. Plus,I want to know if these people will be armed in states other than what their carry permit allows. Where do they get the right to carry where ordinary citizens are denied?
Concealed carry has saved my life twice. And just for the recored, getting shot does NOT hurt. It happens to fast. And I would recommend NOTHING smaller than a .45 caliber.
Just say'n.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseConcealed carry has saved my life twice. And just for the recored, getting shot does NOT hurt. It happens to fast. And I would recommend NOTHING smaller than a .45 caliber.
Just say'n.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusejaywye: Recently the GOA's ratings have become completely useless as they've scored things like Obamacare that don't directly impinge on the RKBA (heck, Reid slipped in some gun owner protections while it was under his control). While I agree with scoring the DISCLOSE act and McCain-Fiengold, they inexplicably didn't score the final House CCW in National Parks vote while scoring a whole bunch of previous procedural votes on the issue plus any expansion of the National Parks system.
They give every appearance of now being more a conservative/Republican advocacy group than a pro-RKBA group. You can go to their site and score votes on your own, but otherwise I hate to say that the NRA is now much more useful (they're certainly not useless).
That said, I don't know how they scored Shuler, it's archived now.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse