Peter King’s Answer to Tucson Shooting

by Jack Lee

3990-aking2389.jpg

Congressman Peter King has proposed that a law be passed making it illegal to carry a gun within one thousand feet of a Congressman.

In the unlikely event an armed madman bent on a murderous rampage plans to show up at another political rally, he will now be dissuaded, because he could face a potential fine and/or incarceration for carrying a gun too close to his intended Congressional victim.

You must think I’m joking, right? No, I wish I were – it would be easier to explain. Unfortunately, this is exactly what Mr. King has proposed, and I’m trying very hard to restrain myself from saying exactly what of think of this poster boy for the south end of a north bound horse! Even his colleagues are uneasy and embarrassed over this one, but it’s going to come up for a vote anyway.

This is the kind of irresponsible, knee jerk action that is bound to happen when foolish politicians try too hard to capitalize on an isolated tragedy.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Peter King’s Answer to Tucson Shooting

  1. Quentin Colgan says:

    The corporations don’t want us to have guns either–for they will be the first targets in any sensible revolution–as they are the cause of our ills. Try asking your pals in the TEA party to stop this!
    Oh, well.
    Had you been fighting for the rights of Americans, instead of the rights of the Republican Party, this could maybe be stopped.
    Partisanship kills civil rights.

  2. Post Scripts says:

    Quentin, we may have a partisan bias towards conservatives, but when we champion rights they are rights that are extended to everyone. It’s not fair to say we champion only Republican rights.

    Here’s just a few examples of the issues and rights we champion and believe in – which of these do you NOT agree with:

    We want all laws passed to be in full compliance with the Constitution.
    We want less government intrusion into our daily lives and more freedom.
    We want to keep as much of our hard earned money as possible.
    We want a smaller, more responsible and accountable government.
    We want a strong military, free from foreign entanglements.
    We do not want NATO to set our government policies or regulate our laws.
    We want to retain our sovereignty, and be free from foreign manipulations or influence.
    We believe in the free market system.
    We believe in secure borders and controlled immigration.
    We believe that government spending is out of control and must be reigned in and the national debt reduced, not its limits expanded.
    We believe in inalienable rights and equality.
    We do not believe in the forced transfer of wealth by government regulation.
    We believe that government should do what it is constitutionally allowed to do and nothing more and all other things should be left up to private business.
    We believe in taxation with fair and honest representation.
    We believe in the 2nd amendment.
    We support and encourage free speech.

  3. Tina says:

    A lame attempt to placate the gun haters per chance? Who knows.

    If we could get that we can’t have a perfect world no matter how many laws we write….oh well, this too will pass.

  4. Chris says:

    I support strong gun control laws to protect our citizens, but this idea sounds silly and elitist to me. The fact that it makes special rules for members of congress is just wrong; they are not royalty, and they are not entitled to any more protection than anybody else.

  5. Harold Ey says:

    EXCELLENT POINT Chris ! Wow do I agree with you on that one!

  6. Toby says:

    Maybe elected officials should work at the job they were elected for and stop running for reelection as soon as they are sworn in to office.
    I for one do not need to see my elected officials. I just need to know they are hard at work doing the peoples business (as if that will ever happen).
    As far as I know the office buildings these people work in have all kinds of security in place and seems like it would be very very hard to attack them at work.

  7. Tina says:

    Great point Chris. Their station as our representatives doesn’t come with special insulation against these types of senseless acts. It could happen to any of us at any time.

    Toby good point. The responsibility to communicate with out representatives truly rests with us…we have a multitude of ways to let congressmen know what’s on our minds! It would be more satisfying, however, if we didn’t receive generic letters in response, complete with self-praise designed to garner votes in the next election…lol.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.