“This is the nation’s capital, and we have a higher public safety burden than any other city in this country.” – D.C. Councilman Phil Mendelson [via foxnews.com], asserting that the District is in compliance with the Supreme Court’s Heller ruling, introducing legislation to streamline D.C.’s handgun licensing requirements and fees, noting that Washington will always have restrictive gun laws.

18 Responses to Quote of the Day: Undue Burden Edition

  1. ‘Washington will always have restrictive gun laws’
    “This is the nation’s capital, and we have a higher public safety burden than any other city in this country”

    How many idiots will respond yeah that sounds about right? The statements above are irrational and illogical in many ways. IMO, Washington DC has (in principle) the duty or responsibility to uphold to the highest standards honoring the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Of course all cities do too yet DC is in the spotlight.

    • Exactly what I was thinking as soon as I read that quote.

      DC is simply a sad place. Taxation without representation. At the capital. Of the country that became independent partially due to the same concept.

      lol

    • “IMO, Washington DC has (in principle) the duty or responsibility to uphold to the highest standards honoring the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.”

      I agree.

  2. “ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
    BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.”

    Because clearly, politicians are irreplaceable.

  3. “we have a higher public safety burden than any other city in this country”

    What’s the violent crime rate in DC again? And yet you dare talk about public safety? The only safety in DC is for politicians like Phil Mendelson who have taxpayer funded armed security for them and their family.

  4. I guess to be fair, we should give Councilman Mendelson credit for taking a step in the right direction and reducing the red-tape involved with legal gun ownership in the district.

    Its not enough, but it is progress.

    • I’ll give him a chance, but I cannot give him credit for going forward when the weight of the Supreme Court is pushing him forward. I will reserve judgement, good or bad, till actions are actually taken.

    • I live next door to the district in Arlington County Virginia. We used to be part of Northwest DC until the 1830s when the Feds gave us back to Virginia. Northwest is the “good” part of DC with similar, if not better, socio-economic characteristics as North Arlington yet it has at least twice the violent crime rate as Arlington. I can walk my dogs in Arlington parks at night with minimal risk. Nobody would do that in Northwest. While I carry when am out with the dogs I have never felt threatened. In all the time I have carried I have never felt a need to draw my weapon. The closest I have come is flicking off the safety when I saw someone approach who was acting a little squirrely. Of course I can’t prove it but I think parks are relatively safe because many Virginians are walking around with guns.

    • Good link.

      “Many believe the police are handling the spike the best they can.
      “It’s disturbing, but I have faith in Chief (Cathy) Lanier. She’ll solve this problem,” a resident said.”

      — That type of thinking or rather emotionalizing above reminds me of the mindset or is it heart-set(?) of the people in San Francisco.

      “In nearly half of the robberies, the attackers threatened the victims with a gun”.

      — Was a gun actually seen or just alluded to being in the perps pocket? Did the thug use a fake (easy to buy) replica gun? Perhaps the statistic cited above is accurate and perhaps not. It seems strange that thugs, many of whom will have criminal records and therefore not be able to legally purchase a gun, are now suddenly buying guns. Bottom line: when I read the story it seemed like just more media anti-gun propaganda. A good journalist would have tied in the story with how such events are motivating previous non-gun owners to buy guns.

  5. The root of the problem is the statement: “higher public safety burden”. This is equating public safety inversely proportional to armed citizens, when the opposite is true. This mentality is promoted by the leftists and infuses the fabric of society like a bad stain.

  6. The cited news article quotes Emily Miller, a senior opinion editor at The Washington Times and crime victim.
    “These gun control measures are so counterproductive because they are not stopping the criminals from getting guns,” Miller says, adding, “They are stopping the law-abiding people from getting guns to protect themselves.”
    What a surprise!

    Reading the article cited by Dirk Diggler, further supports what has been said here many times and illustrated in the UK and Australia – as soon as the criminals feel “safe” from their unarmed victims – wholesale predation begins.

    ‘This is the nation’s capital, and we have a higher criminal safety burden than any other city in this country,’ Mendelson said.“ – There! Fixed that for you, Councilman Mendelson.

  7. I saw this tool (Phil) during the “Emily gets her gun in DC” series for the Washington Times – she post the “city council” type hearing with her testifying and Phil asking the questions. He came off as an Elitist – to which I immediately knew he was not worth my time in trying to convince – those sorts simply need to be defeated quickly.

  8. I didn’t realize that D.C. had the lowest violent crime rates in the country. Well, I guess if gun control is working for them…

  9. “This is the nation’s capital, and we have a higher public safety burden than any other city in this country.”
    Well…they do have a higher safety burden because D.C. is a dangerous place due to their stupid gun laws.
    Catch-22.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *