Previous Post
Next Post


But if these Second Amendment-purists really think that guns make places safer, if they really think that guns are an important check on government and safeguard of liberty, then why do so many of them keep their workplace—the U.S. Capitol—free of firearms? – Josh Zeitz in If Guns Make Us Safer, Why Not Let Them Into the U.S. Capitol? [at]

Previous Post
Next Post


    • He isn’t discounting them. It’s the exact same reason I was pleasantly surprised when I visited the TX Capitol. If you really believe in gun rights, why would you say they are ok in the workplace of others, but not in yours? In the case of the Hill, the armed CapPolice (who I have never been impressed by when it comes to being professionals), are there to protect Congress. It’s a case of guns for me, not for thee.

      On paper, the CapPolice are protecting everybody, but every experience I’ve had with them points to, “you’re on your own” if a situation develops – they’ll be busy protecting the more important among us.

      • I don’t think so , If these despots were rational thinking people , but I actually think these folks would kill each other and I …………. wait , hey ,wow , you may be on to something . Harry Reid , Nancy Pelosi and John Bonner kill each other in a wild shootout while in a closed conference . NICE ! I change my position already , we should make it mandatory and we could get our term limits problems solved . Great idea .

    • ^This. If they got rid of the security, then the shepherds would likely change their disposition.

      • If they got rid of K street and kept all lobbyists outside the western perimeter of the DC loop, it would be much less fun for the a-holes to work there and they might go back to their POS states and work at McDonalds.(no, probably Burger King).
        Like police, as soon ss they think they’re better than the people they serve, they are PERMANENTLY less. It’s easy for them to feel superior when they only have to answer to K street.

    • We allow permit holders to carry in our state capital here in Texas. No problems so far and it’s been years. In fact some people working there have gotten permits and carry so they can go trough the CCW line, it’s faster.

      • Exactly … no problems with concealed or open carry in my state capital as well.

        It would be no different in the U.S. Capital Building.

      • Two problems with that comparison:

        First, the Texas legislature is only a part time legislature. While the capitol building is open basically year round, the legislature is only actually even in session only for about six months or so every other year in odd numbered years. So about 75% of the time, the whole issue of firearms in proximity of politicians is moot.

        Second, Texas law also forbids firearms on the premises during a government meeting, which would include when the legislature is actually in session. That’s the other 25% of the time.

        So I’m not sure how much of an example our legislature is, when you can only carry firearms, with a license, when nothing but tourism presentations are going on.

    • Probably would. I can recall of only one case where a State legislator committed an aggravated assault against another member. Only 2 vice presidents ever shot someone, and only one was killed.

      Some State legislatures allow civilian guns in the Capital building. In fact, the Minnesota legislature just deemed having a MN carry permit proper notice to the Capital Police that you intend to carry in the capital building. (But, then, they all expect fellow Minnesotans to observe the conventions of “Minnesota nice” which presumes holster discipline.)

  1. What a smug condescending JO

    The capitol is not gun free, there are guns everywhere. Only the masters and their dogs have them though, normal everyday citizens are not “allowed”

    • Yep– there are guns in the Capitol 24/7 and they have been used on occasion to stop folks with bad intentions (and a few folks whose intentions are still up for debate. Of course, they’re dead so we’ll never really know).

  2. Yes, I agree, let them into the Capital. Sounds like a great plan to me. After all, crime in D.C. couldn’t get much worse. Also, like someone else said “They are already there”. Look at all the security forces and bodyguards. They are all armed. So, lets open up the doors and let the common man and women be allowed to have them for protection as well.

  3. It works just fine at the Capitol in Texas, where any CHL permit holder is welcome to enter the building without even passing through a metal detector (and many members of the state legislature are carrying as well).

    • My thought exactly. And I’ve gone armed inside the Capitol myself just because I could.

      • Yep, I’ve even had the DPS guy joke with me about which one I wanted to shoot. I told him it all depended on how they behave that day. It’s great to be treated like a responsible adult citizen instead of a criminal.

    • Yeah, but only during the 18 months every two years when the legislature is OUT of session and no politicians are even there. When the legislature is actually in session, firearms are banned.

  4. It’s is a secure facility with its own armed force. This is a stupid querie. If our children’s schools were secure, locked well, with specific entry procedures and trained armed security personnel, would we want our fifth graders packing heat?

    • The movie “Pay it Forward” near the end & the game “Life is Strange” in the first 30 minutes show what a “gun free zone” is & one was supposed to be secure.

    • would we want our fifth graders packing heat? I dunno, most kids around 11 were shooting and hunting with .22 rifles and 12 gauge shotguns back in the day. Usually the kids were more proficient than the cops.

    • Seriously H? At 11 years old, I had a .22lr pump action Winchester rifle in my closet at home that I could take out and shoot any time I wanted without my parents permission.

      Up until very recently, historically speaking, school children routinely carried shotguns and rifles walking to school or in their cars or trucks if they drove, and would shoot at school in shooting clubs or would hunt rabbits and birds going back home.

      It is because of the liberal/progressive/statist cancer in our schools over the last fifty years, that we have this constant drum beat that regular human beings, from our children to adults are masses of uncontrollable emotion, raging cauldrons of homicidal rage that needs government control and management because the “masses” are incapable of doing so themselves, especially when it comes to carrying and using guns wisely.

  5. Reading the responses on Politico I’m embarrassed by the name calling and tit for tat repartee’.

    That kind of thing hurts both sides. It shows folks to be ignorant and emotionally driven. That fuels the, “we better take their guns away. I told you they were crazy!” and the “we’d better get more ammo because those folks are irrational!” stances. :):)

    • With idiots such as this writing stupid articles, it just might be best to to get people to buy more ammo and join the NRA.

  6. With armed police the People’s House is not a gun free zone. It’s a gun free zone for individual citizens who want to visit their house and elective representatives…in defense of liberty, 500 men descending on the Capital with arms would ignore metal detectors and a sign.

  7. I see no problem with the suggestion that we all be allowed to carry anywhere, anytime. If everyone could agree to specific areas where oc is not allowed, ok.

    I would also like to see all private security disbanded for those folks who want to restrict firearms in any way, carry or ownership.

    If everyone is on a level playing field where personal security is concerned I think the conversations around guns would be very different than now.

    I know, I’m still looking for the unicorns covered in pixie dust.

  8. Of course Politico doesn’t provide any way to comment or Mr. Zeitz’s ingenuous strawman argument would have already been destroyed under a flood of responses pointing out that it is not the pro-gun side which is banning guns for the citizens of Washington, DC. Rather it is the oligarchs and plutocrats in power, the ones who like elitists everywhere can count on “exceptions” for their own armed bodyguards while banning guns for the hoi polloi who might, if armed, take it upon themselves to take their government back.

    • +1…the exception being the only thing needed to take our government back, is a mark on a ballot.

  9. A quick review of American history reveals that a gun-free DC is a relatively new creation. Bringing guns into the District, including those most hallowed institutions – the White House and the Congress, used to be a common event, just as bringing them into schools was. Now it is shunned and made illegal. Too bad really, from what I’ve read, more than a few fist fights, canings, sword duels, and shots were exchanged between members of Congress – sometimes while they were in session! Oh, to have been in the peanut gallery during such times! Perhaps we should lift all the bans and let the games begin again. CSPAN could become the newest sports channel.

    • It was all those duels that led to a Senate rule banning weapons, first from the chamber floor, and then to the cloak room. This resulted in an essentially weapons free zone, and that must have spread to the banning weapons from the hoi polloi as political assassination became a reasonable concern in the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries.

      • Yep , and back then , just as now , the average American thought those wazoos up there in Washington knew what was best and knew what they were doing and it led to 100 year old congress men voting on issues of real important stuff after 50 years in congress when they could no longer write their names . If they had remained armed we may have never had to deal with Ted Kennedy , Robert ( BIG DADDY ) Bird , and John (The Maverick )McCain .

  10. So the real question is “which guns are we counting?”, because Washington is far from gun free.
    There is plenty of armed security and plenty of criminal use to be found.

    The policy keeps guns for the politicians and crooks while disarming the law abiding public.
    Which says alot in itself…

  11. Hey dips$&t the U.S. Capital police carry select-fire HK 416’s that me and my tax dollars paid for.… gun free my a$$.

  12. Why don’t they allow them in the capital? Because that’s not where the pro second amendment people are. Period. The ones making the laws are NOT the ones that honor freedom and personal responsibility. They’re the ruling class that want subjects instead of citizens, and travel with their armed bodyguards. They get to, but not us ordinary subjects…

  13. Probably most 2A purists would allow guns anyplace, anywhere, anytime in Washington DC….but alas they are not in charge. The Nazis and Communists are in charge of Washington DC and the results are evident.

  14. Apparently this so-called “intellectual” fails to realize that the “2A purists” as he puts it are NOT the people keeping firearms out of the hands of the people in D.C.

  15. “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”

    Robert A. Heinlein

  16. Same reason firearms were often left at the bar in the old west saloons, too many drunken idiots.

    But seriously, gun-free zones are politically motivated, not logically motivated. When in place at Federal buildings the red tape is so deep to have this reversed is often a monumental task due to the bureaucracy which lords over.

    Okay, my first example was most relevant.

  17. If guns don’t make “us” safer (whoever “us” may be), then why not disarm the Secret Service?

  18. Its as plain as the nose on your face. When a gangster is going to meet someone, he has his body guards search the person for weapons. Mainly he has to worry that some one will try to get even with him for some thing. Most of our Politicians are a bunch of dirty crooks, an they are afraid some one will try to get revenge. That’s why they keep passing laws that we have to live under and they don’t. Example, we have to live with Obama Care and they don’t. They can do insider trading, but its against the law we do. There are a lot of people in Prison for tax evasion, but do you think Bill & Hillary Clinton will do time for tax evasion? How about Charlie Rangle? Look what they did to Willie Nelson, and look at what they are doing to Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson. Need I say more!

    • Actually they do have to have ObamaCare, unless they have access to private insurance through their spouse. Just ask Ted Cruz. When his wife changed jobs and lost her health care, he had to sign up for ObamaCare.

      • I am a big fan of Ted and believe he would be our best choice for the next president , because he is a REAL ‘constitutional scholar’ and I believe he would restore state rights and really try to restore constitutional order and reform , giving back power to congress and limiting the executive branch power grabs , BUT I think he should shove Barry care up their asses . He could afford to do it . Rush L. does not have insurance . If you can afford not to have insurance , you should . It wasn’t really that long ago that a very small percentage of Americans had insurance , now it’s getting to a point where you have trouble finding a doctor that accepts cash . It is very close to being mandatory now , ‘ for the good of the collective , comrades ‘.
        I’m getting more pissed with every thought and every word , Peace out brothers .

  19. Sleight of hand to call those who ban guns in government buildings “Second Amendment-purists”

  20. Let all those who are not federally “prohibited persons” carry in the Capitol. The Capitol Police are armed, and the legislators exempt themselves from almost all laws, so I expect that there are more than a few armed Senators & Representatives. No blood running in the Congress to date, so let’s all be able to carry in the federal buildings we paid for.

Comments are closed.