Comments on: House Passes D.C. Gun Bill

By: Reid

Reid — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:16:34 +0000

I’m tired of Norton’s flip-flopping. Her platform in 2006 was explicitly anti-baby strangling. Yet here she is, once again, clearly advocating baby strangling. Make up your mind already!

By: Mike DeBonis

Mike DeBonis — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:11:27 +0000

Yeah, I’m just reading it and am more than a little confused. Will post in entirely above in a second.

By: KCinDC

KCinDC — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:10:23 +0000

Yeah, I still don’t understand — just pointing out the comments in case someone could make sense of them. Davis voted for the bill because he thinks it’s a sham?

By: Mike DeBonis

Mike DeBonis — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:07:04 +0000

Maybe so, but when Mark Souder first tried this back in 2004, this is what Davis said, according to the Post:

“No one should question the importance of keeping fully loaded assault weapons off the streets of the District,” Davis said. “There is an important place for debate on D.C. gun laws — that is in the chambers of the D.C. Council, not the Congress.”

By: KCinDC

KCinDC — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:58:47 +0000

A friend of mine says Davis's vote is no surprise and points to his comments on pages 10-11 here.

By: KCinDC

KCinDC — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:51:34 +0000

At least Wayne Gilchrest, the other local-ish Republican lame-duck proponent of DC voting rights, voted the right way.

By: Mike DeBonis

Mike DeBonis — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:49:44 +0000

I know, WTF? I have a call in to his press guy.

By: KCinDC

KCinDC — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:44:36 +0000

Tom Davis!? What’s up with that? Is he ingratiating himself with the wingnuts for a future lobbying position?