President Trump should meet with this person face to face and ask why he did that. Ask who he was going to shoot. Ask if it's okay to take that person away from their family. It should be recorded and made available for everyone to see.
The day before would have been a trial run. But detection would have resulted in presumably severe consequences, so this suggests the person was prepared to run that risk in order to assure he could get through on a future occasion. For what purpose?
I'm agreeable with concealed carry on one's person when around and about, but it should be standard operating procedure that the House offices---like any respectable 19th-century western saloon---would require them to be surrendered at the door and held in detention until leaving for the day. But I am sure there is a complete prohibition of firearms. WDC is not 2nd Amendment friendly.
There's a bit to unpack here. What were the staffer"s motives, did they intend harm or not. Also it sounds like apparently someone knew about it the day before and just let them be.
This, and the resolute desk. Hopefully they can smoke out all the rats and get them dealt with.
Motives. Not relevant. Firearms are strictly controlled with harsh punishment. A general citizen would be getting prison just for the act regardless of the motive. Nobody is above the law
Why does he need a "purpose" to exercise his 2nd Amendment right? DC is not 2nd Amendment friendly, but it seems like most people here are also not 2nd Amendment friendly.
You all literally believe that the government ought to be able to have the sole authority to tell you when your 2nd Amendment right applies and when it doesn't. I know you don't think you believe that, but it's exactly the logical entailment of your position as well as everyone else on this site who is saying that the staffer shouldn't have been allowed to carry.
This was a democrat and democrats want to control guns. By right no democrat should exercise that right because it goes against their beliefs. Don't equivocate them with us because we don't get treated the same under the law ever. Ifnyou did it you'd be in prison. Try wearing one open carry intona post office see what happens.
It is commonly understood that the owner of a property can impose restrictions on entry to the property. Violation of those restrictions is trespass. You don't object to that if you visit anyone at their home. Get used to it.
There is no ordinary need to carry a firearm in a workplace (unless you want to go Postal, which is the concern here). You can keep it in your automobile while working. Or they can set up a check-in for safe keeping. To violate a safety / access restriction in connection with reaching sensitive areas is a flag for an ulterior purpose.
The right to light up a cigarette is so well-accepted, it is beneath notice---but there are "no smoking" restrictions that must be obeyed or you are removed. And there is no justification for lighting up while you are fueling your car (a mark of socially hazardous stupidity).
President Trump should meet with this person face to face and ask why he did that. Ask who he was going to shoot. Ask if it's okay to take that person away from their family. It should be recorded and made available for everyone to see.
Maybe he wasn't going to shoot anyone, from what Tarik said the staffer did the same thing the day before and nobody stopped him. Idk though.
The day before would have been a trial run. But detection would have resulted in presumably severe consequences, so this suggests the person was prepared to run that risk in order to assure he could get through on a future occasion. For what purpose?
I'm agreeable with concealed carry on one's person when around and about, but it should be standard operating procedure that the House offices---like any respectable 19th-century western saloon---would require them to be surrendered at the door and held in detention until leaving for the day. But I am sure there is a complete prohibition of firearms. WDC is not 2nd Amendment friendly.
There's a bit to unpack here. What were the staffer"s motives, did they intend harm or not. Also it sounds like apparently someone knew about it the day before and just let them be. This, and the resolute desk. Hopefully they can smoke out all the rats and get them dealt with.
Motives. Not relevant. Firearms are strictly controlled with harsh punishment. A general citizen would be getting prison just for the act regardless of the motive. Nobody is above the law
Why does he need a "purpose" to exercise his 2nd Amendment right? DC is not 2nd Amendment friendly, but it seems like most people here are also not 2nd Amendment friendly.
You all literally believe that the government ought to be able to have the sole authority to tell you when your 2nd Amendment right applies and when it doesn't. I know you don't think you believe that, but it's exactly the logical entailment of your position as well as everyone else on this site who is saying that the staffer shouldn't have been allowed to carry.
This was a democrat and democrats want to control guns. By right no democrat should exercise that right because it goes against their beliefs. Don't equivocate them with us because we don't get treated the same under the law ever. Ifnyou did it you'd be in prison. Try wearing one open carry intona post office see what happens.
It is commonly understood that the owner of a property can impose restrictions on entry to the property. Violation of those restrictions is trespass. You don't object to that if you visit anyone at their home. Get used to it.
There is no ordinary need to carry a firearm in a workplace (unless you want to go Postal, which is the concern here). You can keep it in your automobile while working. Or they can set up a check-in for safe keeping. To violate a safety / access restriction in connection with reaching sensitive areas is a flag for an ulterior purpose.
The right to light up a cigarette is so well-accepted, it is beneath notice---but there are "no smoking" restrictions that must be obeyed or you are removed. And there is no justification for lighting up while you are fueling your car (a mark of socially hazardous stupidity).
Being able to conceal carry does NOT apply in this situation!
Anytime! Kek
These people are psychopaths.