Whambulance Arrives For Would-Be Gun Toting U.S. Senators

Politico, oi vey:

Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz are asking for help in bringing unloaded guns to Wednesday’s Judiciary Committee hearing.

The senators have run into hurdles with local and federal law enforcement.

“In anticipation of tomorrow’s hearing on gun control, we instructed our staff to work to ensure various unloaded firearms, under law enforcement supervision, could be brought into the hearing,” Graham and Cruz, wrote to Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy. “Our offices worked with various officials in local and federal law enforcement, as well as the Senate Sergeant at Arms, but it appears that the requirements to secure the weapons at the hearing are so impractical as to be unworkable.”

Yes, folks, apparently it's very, very hard to enter the United States Capitol with even an unloaded firearm! This is due both to gun laws in place throughout the District of Columbia, as well as (obviously) heavier restrictions inside the U.S. Capitol itself. We would think this would fall under the heading of, you know, common sense, but there's lots of history to explain prohibition of guns inside the Capitol too. The first that came to mind for us occurred in 1954:

On March 1st, 1954 the United States Capitol was under attack and five Members of Congress were shot.

The attackers, Lolita Lebrón, Rafael Cancel Miranda, Andres Figueroa Cordero, and Irving Flores Rodríguez, displayed a Puerto Rican flag before shooting. The four were part of a Puerto Rican nationalist gang that tried to assassinate President Truman in 1950.

They opened fire from the visitor’s gallery of the House of Representatives. After shooting over 30 rounds at 240 Representatives, the four Puerto Ricans wounded five members: Alvin Bentley of Michigan, Ben Jensen of Iowa, Clifford Davis of Tennessee, George Fallon of Maryland, and Kenneth Roberts of Alabama. All five survived.

Wait, crazy people and terrorists might want to shoot at members of Congress from the galleries? Come to think of it, yes! They might! And that's a pretty unassailably good reason to keep guns out of the place.

And of course, no history student can forget the 1856 beating of Sen. Charles Sumner by Rep. Preston Brooks with a cane–evidence at least of the kinds of passions that can be stoked under the Capitol dome. True, canes aren't banned, but guns are substantially easier to hurt people with than canes, and a gun is not really a "dual use technology" like, well, a cane. Anyway, guns are hard to bring into the Capitol, and that, all told, is a very good thing.

And no matter how cool it may be to lovingly fondle a gun during a hearing (maybe shortening that hearing considerably), it kind of seems like gratuitous machismo not worth bending security rules over?

In fact, we're really not sure about the advisability of Republican politicians pushing the limits of gun laws as we debate the response to mass shootings. It seems a bit disrespectful, but maybe we're just quaint like that.

13 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. roccoprahn says:

    Grassley just finished reading the brief the nra/alec provided him for his  pro  school/shopping mall/theater/church assault weapon enabled massacre opening statement.

    He obviously hadn't had time to read it before the Senate Judiciary Hearing, as he stumbled and fumbled through it. But the gun industry hack earned his "A" by getting the pro massacre nra message out.

    His opening statement clearly stated the pinko advocacy of the gun industry fight.

    This is going to be a donnybrook. Congresswoman Giffords had opened before the sycophant Grassley. She passionately asked for courageous action by Congress.

    We'll see.

  2. JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

    Did they get the guns in? I haven't heard.


    • roccoprahn says:

      I can't imagine the hard and fast rule being waived because these two twits threw a tantrum.

      But Cruz and Graham earned their "A's" for stirring it up. Like little kids, waiving their hands, jumping up and down, trying to get the Vietnam era draft dodging Lappierre's attention.

      These creeps are beneath contempt.

  3. harrydobyharrydoby says:

    Oh Noes!  The US Capitol is a "gun-free zone".

    How will righteous, God-fearing GOP Senators and Representatives defend themselves against logic, reason and reality?  They are left completely defenseless!

  4. Progressive Promoter says:

    You just can't make this stuff up.

  5. Bokonon says:

    Clearly the only answer would be to allow people to bring loaded weapons into the Senate, and for the Senators to start packing heat.  So the Senators can be in a position to return fire.  And then bad guys and terrorists hanging out in the Senate gallery and hallways will be intimidated.  And all will be peaceful.

    I mean … if the Second Amendment is an unfettered right to have guns everywhere, and arming everyone is an OK remedy for schools, sporting events, and other government buildings … why not?   Besides, doesn't the NRA argue that the Second Amendment is supposed to allow Americans a private right of individual armed insurrection against their elected government, if they feel that the government is tyrannical?

    How about it, Senator Grassley?  How about it?

    • Gray in Mountains says:

      I read recently that about 50% of the MO leg is packing on the floor. Probably anticipating that the statue of Rush may come to life

    • VanDammerVanDammer says:

      Maybe asshole GrASSley needs to look around the US Capitol and find the brass plaque that reads:

      WHO, ON JULY 24, 1998, HERE


      dunno, maybe there's a reason that NO guns are allowed in the US Capitol

      • roccoprahn says:

        Well done Van Dammer.

        And well said re: moral hypocrites in the previous post as well. As for the Korean War era draft dodger (How'd he pull THAT ONE off?……..everybody was going!) Grassley, I honestly don't think he actually and morally cares one way or another about any position he takes. He goes with the "customer" or "client". Not the people of Iowa. Or the country. Definitely Doesn't give a hoot about Congresswoman Giffords, the mall victims or the Newtown 26. There's no pot 'o gold there.

        This time, the customer is the firearms industry.

        Remember, he played the "pull the plug on gramma" routine during the Health Legislation debate while lobbying as a US Senator for the Health Insurance lobby.

        Whether Grassley actually cares one way or the other about gun legislation, we'll probably never know. But the payoff that comes with lobbying for the gun industry is obviously up there that of the Health Insurers.

        The old draft dodger knows what side his bread's buttered on.

      • EccentricRepublicanEccentricRepublican says:

        Right but if EVERYBODY in the Capitol had had a gun that day…

        • roccoprahn says:

          I don't really know what to make of your posts, but to me you come off as creepy, like lappierre, and snotty and cynical like maybe dennis miller or john caldera or greg gutfeld from faux. I can't tell if you're just being sarcastic, but your post about outing a gay kid to his or her "peers" in the "At least it's not your State's….."  thread makes you out to be a mean spirited voyeur/bully/sissy combo like scumney was in prep school. You know, the time mittens' buddies held the kid down while mittens cut his hair. Or when the future Vietnam era draft dodging failed pinko Presidential candidate walked the blind professor into the door. Again, while mittens was still in "prep school".

          When you come off like two really creepy crawlers…….lappierre and mittens, or somebody that's from colorado peak politics, ya got issues.

          If you're just joshin' that's kind of different …………….but ya still sound really fucking creepy. A little too much like a typical mean spirited redleg.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.