Previous Post
Next Post
phil mendelson-cx*304

According to Emily Miller, DC Council Chairman Phil Mendelson emailed her this message in a pathetic attempt to argue that – despite a district court ruling in Palmer v. DC this past weekend – the constitutional rights of Americans should still stop at the District’s borders:

“Because of the District’s unique national security concerns, the right to carry a firearm in public must be more heavily restricted than any place else in the nation. Four U.S. presidents have been assassinated by gunfire, and at least five others have been shot at, including Ronald Regan who was seriously wounded in 1981. Neither the Secret Service nor the Capitol Police will disclose all incidents where they have recovered firearms, but we do know that just two years ago someone hit the White House with gunfire, and there are frequent threats on the foreign diplomatic corps.”

Consider the preposterous assumptions inherent in that statement. It really comes down to two . . .

1. Americans have to give up their rights to add some highly questionable measure of unproven protection to federal politicians and foreign diplomats.

2. Politicians are so much more important than other citizens that no sacrifice on the part of the people is too much, as long as it makes the politicians feel marginally safer.

This turns the core values of our constitutional republic on their head. Politicians are elected to serve us.   We do not exist to serve them. There is no lack of politicians. For every powerful politician, there are dozens…no, hundreds…well, thousands of people just as able, who would love to have the opportunity to serve. Those chosen should assume the position in full knowledge that they assume some risk. If a little more risk comes with the service so that our rights are protected, that’s something that every soldier already accepts. They should have to accept it as well if they want to represent us. Every single one of them has volunteered. All have fought hard for the positions that they are in.

Politicians are all too plentiful and very easily replaced. There’s a virtually unlimited supply of them. Our rights, however, are fragile, constantly under assault by special interests, self-appointed advocates, so-called experts and, well, politicians. Once degraded, they are not easily regained. Once destroyed, it takes enormous effort, blood and treasure to restore them. A great many Americans have given their lives to protect our rights. It is not too much to ask that politicians assume a little risk to preserve them, too.

Life is risk. To live is to put yourself at risk. Politicians, as public servants, should be willing to shoulder as much risk as the ordinary pizza delivery person. Most do. In return, they get the perks and privileges of representing us and the responsibility of wielding power in our name.

Let us have no more foolish talk of the people giving up rights for insignificant increases in a politician’s perceived sense of security.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. love your eloquent definition of how plentiful replacement politicians are. they fight over the chance to get those plush positions, so they can continue to fight to be reelected. unfortunately, they forget what their responsibility and duties are.

    • They know perfectly well what they are:

      1. Get as much money and power as quickly as you can
      2. Get reelected to avoid working for a living


  2. I am sure if the Washingtonian Magazine did the same kind of research the Chicago Magazine did they would find a close relationship between DC street gangs and the Democratic Party. Their biggest fear is that an armed citizenry will put down the gangs the way Detroiters have been doing of late. Once the people take that step they will realize that it is the same Democratic Party elites that have kept them poor and at the mercy of thugs.

  3. Chairman Mendelson should relax, and be reassured by the fact that violent crime in D.C. has been declining ever since the Heller decision.

  4. She needs to put this fool on blast in the paper and just entitle it “Your elected reps think their lives matter more than yours”

    She also needs to ask him that since he is neither a high ranking federal official or a foreign diplomat, does this mean the po-po guarding the council chambers and all of DC gov’t should be pulled out voluntarily and re-deployed elsewhere to protect the “betters”?

    can’t wait to see him do a Gregory Hines tap dance routine next trying to talk his way out of this.

  5. They can send the entire armed forces to go fight and die in a desert shithole (or more accurately, two desert shitholes), but God forbid the politicians assume any risk.

    It’s not like we have royal bloodlines to protect or potential power struggles to avoid. Even if the President were to be assassinated during his term, the transition of power would still occur to the VP. It’s happened before, and I’m sure that everyone involved would want to make it happen as quickly and smoothly as possible. We have quite a robust system in that regard.

    • There’s a true fact that the establishment is terriried of becoming common public knowledge – the entire bureaucracy could be swallowed up in a huge sink hole, and the vast majoriity of people’s lives wouldn’t change very much, except for the ease with which people could get things done without government interference.

      Reagan hit the nail on the head – government isn’t the solution to your problems – government IS the problem!

      • That was very well said and Reagan hit the nail on the head quite a few times. He even understood the importance of the 2nd Amendment to the 1st, 4th, 10th and 14th Amendments as well. We don’t need big government, we need a small government that adheres to the seven enumerated powers and allows the people’s of the individual states to choose their destinies. I don’t understand why people can’t understand that, oh yeah that is right I forgot, they don’t want to work!

  6. The real ‘assumption’ here is that DC’s handgun ban means sweet FA to some guy who wants to whack politicos. Isn’t killing a Pres already a felony? So making it illegal to bring a gun to do the job does… what? This guy is posturing to ‘justify’ his increasingly untenable position.

    • Exactly. How many of the crimes he mentioned were committed by people that would be eligible under the new ruling (CCW holders and non-felons)?

  7. “The constitutional rights of Americans should still stop at the District’s borders:”
    Well once these fools give up their 1st amendment rights to free speech and the yellow journalists give up their “freedom of the press”, Then we may consider, not useing our firearms. However, how much gun violence was going on in DC before this ruling? When it was illegal to have a gun?

    • Remember the New York Avenue riots? Remember Carl Rowan? Care to relive “the good old days” Phil?

        • The New York Avenue riots burned a large section of DC to the ground. The DC National Guard had to be activated to stop the illegally armedrioters.

          Carl Rowan shot a boy in his fenced in yard in DC with an illegally possessed, unlicensed pistol. Being part of the DC aristocracy, he had to surrender his pistol as punishment. He subsequently got another.

          These are the “good old days” that Phil wants to preserve.

        • yea, I’m familiar with all of that. I just misread the name. I actually posted to that effect a few minutes before your reply. 🙂

  8. And just why does ANYONE think that banning guns in DC will prevent a CRIMINAL from taking a gun into DC and using it? What genius logic that is. If that will work, I hope they outlaw incompetence, corruption, asshattery, stupidity and wastefulness right away. They can fix DC politics that quickly. 🙂

    • I have carried repeatedly in DC, NYC, and Chicago for over 25 years. Since nobody attacked me, nobody knew. I knew where I was, and would have driven away if I’d ever had to produce, without prosecuting, but I would have been able to protect myself and my family.

    • I love it! I’ve been known to say “jackassery” from time to time, but now I can spice it up with some variety, with “asshattery”!

      We can’t know a man’s heart, but body language and facial expression can tell a lot — this guy looks like an arrogant tyrant.

  9. I am reminded of iRobot (movie) with Will Smith. If we all just give-in, we will be taken care of. If they disarm D.C. then only the crazy politicians will have guns.

  10. How many of those assassinations have been in DC? Only one I was present for was Kennedy, and that was Dallas. Lincoln (I think) was in NY. Which have been in DC? And today, the prez is never even IN DC, why should everybody there give up their rights for that? And if Obama quits because he is no longer protected well enough, that’s win-win. If nobody else wants the job because it is just too dangerous with actual constitutional rights observed, then I will take it on a provisional basis, until the jerks figure out how horribly they have been lied to and start conniving how to get me out, I’ll happily disappear. All such arguments are pure BS, and they know it, and they giggle about how stupid the country is to believe them.

    • Reagan was shot at in DC. Aso, a guy claiming he was shooting at angels or something shot at the white house once. Both of those during the long-lived handgun ban. Seems it worked really well. (sarc)

    • Lincoln was shot IN D.C., not New York. The Ford Theater is a short drive from the White House (by horse and carriage). Garfield was also assassinated in D.C.

  11. This extreme silliness is typical of the DC aristocracy. And they wonder why they keep failing to convince rational people that they should become a state. Does America want more lunatics and cry-babies like this in Congress?

    Nope, just stay “Congress’ Lil’ Plantation on the Potomac.”

  12. I’ve always said that anyone who wants to run for Federal office should be banned from it because they already show a distinct lack of common sense. I have amended that to state-level politics and now I have to add most big cities…

    • Amen to that! I like the House should be comprised of citizens selected via lottery in their own Congressional districts. They should stay in their districts and NEVER go to DC on taxpayer dollars. The candidates would be picked based on background checks, long term residency in the specific district and other eligibility requirements. I further think that the Senators should be elected by the State Legislatures.

      • I could see it now… “Crap, I got picked for House of Representatives duty. This is far worse than jury duty.”

        • Actually, you would be paid the same as you make and you would get pay raises based on the performance of the entire country. Plus your job would be guaranteed back to you after your two years of service. I is better to have obligated members serving thend those that want to serve.

  13. A fearful Politician is EXACTLY what the Founding Fathers had in mind for our Republic so I for one am glad that he is in fear.

  14. When can we start outlawing socialism, communism, & all these other stupid isms in the name of public decency and intelligence??

  15. The irony kills me; that we must give up our rights protected and guaranteed by the Constitution, in order to go see the Constitution.

  16. “…but we do know that just two years ago someone hit the White House with gunfire, and there are frequent threats on the foreign diplomatic corps…”

    I don’t get what their point is (doubt they do either), this happened when it was illegal. And honestly, the whitehouse is protected by snipers. Do you think anyone who is stupid enough to buy themselves an eticket to the afterlife cares if it is legal or not to carry in public? Do these people have proofreaders/ sanity checks?

    I quote Mark Wahlberg from the movie – Shooter… “the only person dumb enough to try something there thinks they have 72virgins waiting for them on the other side.” or something to that effect.

    Meanwhile the rest of us have to pay attention to which metro terminals we pass through at which time pf day so as to avoid intersection with “other” parts of DC, knowing full well that those who wish to do us harm know we are completely helpless.

  17. Those that would make good politicians want nothing to do with politics. We have second and third stringers as our “leaders”…

  18. This is the best argument this a##hat has? Wasn’t Fords Theater in DC? Oh wait there was no real secret service in 1865. As unpopular as most of our presidents become I guess it made sense to Phil. And didn’t a movie get made about murdering W while he was STILL president? Oh yeah I’ll try to catch Emily on the View. Which I hate and my wife hates even more…

  19. Mendelson is a jackwad. The only recent assassination attempt occurred DURING the handgun ban in DC.

    Although the (stayed) ruling tossed all the rules DC’s registered gun owners this was about DC registered gun owners.

    The DC registed gun owner (and I am one) is the most trained, tested, printed, photographed, checked, rechecked gun owner in the United States. We are the gun control advocates’ dream “common sense” “universal background check” gun owners.

    Yet STILL we are totally denied the explicit, stated, guaranteed right to bear arms.

    This should be instructive for everyone else in the country. when the gun controllers get what they want — they want MORE

  20. His statement would seem to assume it’s O.K. to violate the Second and Fourth-through-Seventh Amendments because… WASHINGTON!!

    • Don’t forget about the 14th for Due Process! It’s ridiculous that these people are even ALLOWED by US to speak in these ways!!!

  21. Of the four presidents who have been assassinated, only one was in D.C. at the time (Lincoln). The White House is one of the mot heavily defended government buildings in the world, and apart from being bullet proof, it has its own dedicated police force that answers to the federal government and not to the City. The risk of an assassin attacking a mission or embassy of a foreign government is the same whether there is a carry law or not–as one would reasonably assume that any such assassin will be carrying a concealed weapon or weapons irrespective of what the D.C. law are on the subject. Therefore there is no logic to the good Chairman’s concerns.

  22. Does anyone know when an assassin has been stopped by concealed carry bans?
    Anyone? No?
    Wasn’t JFK shot from multiple blocks away in a building they couldn’t have hoped to secure before his speech? Couldn’t any assassin have gotten into a building near him regardless of CC bans because you can’t put a cop on every street corner of every block and in every building of a city?
    Seriously, these people are crazy to think anything short of bulletproof glass will prevent an assassination.

    • Which is why His Royal Highness passes through DC enclosed within his armored Caddy/Black MRAP. With the gun ban in full effect. And he doesn’t go outside of downtown after dark.

    • I submit that if someone truly intends to commit an act of assassination ,even bullet proof glass would not stop them.

  23. So I assume that if the President or Vice-President (or any other DC politician) travels then those states they visit also have to take on the regulations of DC?

    ‘cuz safety.

  24. “Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason.”
    ― Mark Twain

  25. By their logic, we should deny automobiles in DC because someone might use a car bomb against a politician.

  26. Yet another revealing comment about the state of mind of

    ‘The DC Elite Who Think They Know Whats Best For The Rest Of Us’.

    The Eloi elect a crackhead for Mayor- so this is par for the course for this councilman.

  27. I think at this point if nobody has taken a shot at Obama he’s pretty safe.haha

  28. Beating my head against the wall when I see and read these ass clowns is over. Look at this photo, has there ever been the face of an anti American movement coming at us day after day after day,?
    These folks won’t stop.

    They maybe stopped temporarily today, this month, pre election, but they won’t stop. Not ever.

    As a hard comparison as it is to make, the Japanese would never have surrendered willingly without an overwhelming show of force (twice), For every victory in the court pro gun folks acquire, the fact is “We don’t need no stinking court decisions”, uh,… and go piss up a rope, The Bloombergs, et al,.. are burning money, and even the low information voter ratio is changing attitude. Reference the last video attempt.

    Enough is enough. They have to be politically beat into the ground, in the media, the MSM, the radio, the blogs, etc,…. It’s better this attempt first. Before it gets froggy.

  29. Like the Frenchman said: “I understand the situation, but I just don’t see the problem!”
    We have plenty of politicians. They are a dime a dozen and collectively they are probably not worth that.

  30. Words fail me. This guy has absolutely lost it.
    He doesn’t want guns in DC because he can’t own one. He’s obviously insane.

    • That’s what I said! Yes, i think the 2nd Amendment is the only assurance the People have that the 1st, 4th, 10th and 14th Amendments are still valid!

  31. Unique situation. Weird, it seems like lots of places have ‘unique situations’ or come up with them when they want to restrict rights.

    If that unique situation were solved by banning guns we wouldn’t need the Secret Service, Federal Protective Service, or even the Metro police. Hell, DC would be a haven with no crime. But strangely not. So maybe we should try something else.


    Tattoo that on their COMMENT MODERATED eyeballs.

  33. The silliest part of his argument is regarding his assassination claims. Not all assassination attempts happened in DC, so that’s a moot point considering the President travels elsewhere so often. Plus, when he’s in DC, he’s typically in the WH, which is arguably the most heavily protected location in the country. The same goes for lawmakers, who spend a great deal of time NOT in DC.

  34. Perhaps politicians should spend more time in their districts, with the people the ostensibly represent, instead of taking up residence in the District? Then the District wouldn’t be such an (allegedly) target-rich environment.

    By the way: how’s that unconstitutional law working out for the District’s murder rate?

    • That is VERY interesting you mention that. I have been thinking about this for sometime now, every since the 2000 Election debacle, and last night I finally decided to start work on a People’s Amendment to the United States Constituion. I am looking for input into the idea and I have a Facebook page setup but I don’t have all the SEO setup and I am not easily integrated into the website that I created last night. Now bare with me because it is a VERY ROUGH draft but I would like some sincere input and opinions on it. There are some grammat and spelling errors but I will fix those soon. Would you guys mind looking at it? I am a Software Engineer on the left coast that is a lover of the Constituion and a firm believer that the 2A ensures we have all the A’s! You could call me a Red Man in Blue State and I may just adopt that moniker. THANKS!

Comments are closed.