The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 09:09:47 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Check the Residence Act of 1790.

That's not what was asked.

You didn't check did you?
Prior to 1968, it might have been the DoJ who was investigating a DC
crime. The District was actually governed by a committee in the House
of Representatives. They had no local government and the DC cops
ultimately reported to DoJ.
DC still does not have a voting representative in congress.

And this has WHAT to do with now???!!

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

On 12/27/12 2:41 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 12:52:19 -0500, ESAD wrote:

On 12/27/12 12:43 PM, wrote:



That was rendered moot when DC was given home rule in 1968.
They are running their own city now. Personally I think we would all
be better off if they ceded it back to Maryland, only keeping the
Federal Triangle where the national monuments, capitol, white house
and the majority of federal buildings lie.



Statehood, with one voting u.s. rep and two u.s. senators.

I don't believe the district has the critical mass to be a state.
It may be a little more possible now that they are gentrifying
downtown and shoving the poor people out past the beltway but you
still have a revenue problem.

If they did something like that the government would still want to
carve out their patch.

Ceding the commercial and privately owned areas to Maryland is a more
reasonable option. They have the precedent with the Virginia bite out
of the original diamond.


Critical mass? You mean population? D.C. has about the same population
as Alaska, Vermont, and North Dakota though, obviously, much smaller
geographic area.

D.C. doesn't want to be part of another state. It wants its own
political clout and independence.

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

In article ,
says...

On 12/27/12 9:09 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On 12/26/12 4:15 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/26/2012 2:07 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:14:56 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/c59s6hm

Yeah, it is working great in Chicago and DC where hand guns are
virtually banned

NBC news' David Gregory is in some serious trouble because he asked the
police if he could use a 30 round magazine and was told no they are
illegal to poses in DC. Gregory did it anyway and is now facing the
possibility of being arrested, convicted, fined and jailed.


Do you really think Holder is gonna' let anybody do anything to a
lib-activist? LOL!

Do you think the attorney general of the United States is going to
involve himself in a matter that falls strictly under the purview of the
District of Columbia? I find it hard to believe you actually graduated
from a public high school in Connecticut.

Check the Residence Act of 1790.

That's not what was asked.


The Residence Act? Hehehe. The alleged violation relating to the hi-cap
mag is related to laws of the District of Columbia. The hi-cap mags are
not illegal under federal law.

Congress is in charge of DC. Nothing happens in DC that Congress doesn't
like to have happen, except for the corruption in the mayor's office and
the council.

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

On 12/27/2012 5:18 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Dec 27, 2:17 am, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:37:45 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:05:09 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:14:56 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/c59s6hm

Yeah, it is working great in Chicago and DC where hand guns are
virtually banned

Did you read the article and note the facts given?

Yup but I didn't see them explain Chicago or DC.
I also saw them gloss over Newtown." Connecticut has more restrictions
on gun ownership than most states", the first line of the article.

What's to explain? Chicago and DC don't show up on any mass shooter list
I've seen.
Gangbangers shooting each other, with the occasional innocent
collateral.
Mass shootings happen where gun nuts live.
A legal CT gun nut provided the guns in that case.
Not hard to figure out.
Most mass shootings happen in "gun country," not cities that discourage
gun nuts.
And what makes you think you can't legally have a handgun in Chicago?
NRA tell you that?
Gangbangers and other criminals would have a much harder time getting
guns without the "legal" gun nut purchasers around to make it all easy.
The Lanza woman is a perfect example. A gun nut providing weapons for a
mass shooter.

So you only care about murder when it is white victims.

I see.

No you don't. Gun nuts don't see clearly.
There have always been more gun deaths where there is poverty and gangs.
More stabbings too.
Violent death goes with that territory.
I never grieved over Italian, Irish, German, Russian and Jew mobsters
shooting and slicing each other up either.
These guys are all gun nuts. Part of their "business."

Mass murder is down around snake bite and below lightning as a likely
cause of death.

Gun deaths themselves are rare enough. I never even think about it
unless it's in the news. You and krause probably dwell on it quite a
bit. It's the nature of the gun nut. Comes from fondling guns, I
suppose, and thinking about getting more firepower.
Maybe like a fatty thinking about more pastry. Don't really know.
BTW, the gun death map pretty much follows the Red state/Blue state
pattern.http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-violence.html
Folks living in cracker Republican-voting states have an increased
chance of dying by gun.


Funny, all these mass shootings lately in blue states like Oregon, CT,
NY..... And the blues here are the only ones who seem to have a double
standard and of course I have been subjected to harry fondling and
racking his guns.... so as usual thump, you are full of ****... Of
course, those slacker states produce more "I want mine and now it's
gone" types than the "cracker red states". When little progressive
bitches don't get it handed to them, they seem to resort to shooting
things up.

You talking to me...why?

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:35:01 -0500, BAR wrote:

Do you really think Holder is gonna' let anybody do anything to a
lib-activist? LOL!

Do you think the attorney general of the United States is going to
involve himself in a matter that falls strictly under the purview of the
District of Columbia? I find it hard to believe you actually graduated
from a public high school in Connecticut.

Check the Residence Act of 1790.


That was rendered moot when DC was given home rule in 1968.
They are running their own city now. Personally I think we would all
be better off if they ceded it back to Maryland, only keeping the
Federal Triangle where the national monuments, capitol, white house
and the majority of federal buildings lie.

That would make it much easier for the MoCo PoPo and the PGCo PoPo. They
wouldn't have to have a DC PoPo riding with them in order to chase
criminals across the DC line.

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

In article ,
says...

On 12/27/12 12:43 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:35:01 -0500, BAR wrote:

Do you really think Holder is gonna' let anybody do anything to a
lib-activist? LOL!

Do you think the attorney general of the United States is going to
involve himself in a matter that falls strictly under the purview of the
District of Columbia? I find it hard to believe you actually graduated
from a public high school in Connecticut.

Check the Residence Act of 1790.


That was rendered moot when DC was given home rule in 1968.
They are running their own city now. Personally I think we would all
be better off if they ceded it back to Maryland, only keeping the
Federal Triangle where the national monuments, capitol, white house
and the majority of federal buildings lie.



Statehood, with one voting u.s. rep and two u.s. senators.

Cede the land back to Maryland like the ceded the land across the river
back to Virginia.

If the people in DC want to live in a state they can move to any state
they want, there are 50 to choose from.

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

On 12/27/2012 7:42 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:35:01 -0500, BAR wrote:

Do you really think Holder is gonna' let anybody do anything to a
lib-activist? LOL!

Do you think the attorney general of the United States is going to
involve himself in a matter that falls strictly under the purview of the
District of Columbia? I find it hard to believe you actually graduated
from a public high school in Connecticut.

Check the Residence Act of 1790.


That was rendered moot when DC was given home rule in 1968.
They are running their own city now. Personally I think we would all
be better off if they ceded it back to Maryland, only keeping the
Federal Triangle where the national monuments, capitol, white house
and the majority of federal buildings lie.

That would make it much easier for the MoCo PoPo and the PGCo PoPo. They
wouldn't have to have a DC PoPo riding with them in order to chase
criminals across the DC line.


Hey, hey, hey! Why you callin' them PoPo... krause says only dirtbags
say that? LOL!

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

On 12/27/12 7:47 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/27/2012 7:42 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:35:01 -0500, BAR wrote:

Do you really think Holder is gonna' let anybody do anything to a
lib-activist? LOL!

Do you think the attorney general of the United States is going to
involve himself in a matter that falls strictly under the purview
of the
District of Columbia? I find it hard to believe you actually graduated
from a public high school in Connecticut.

Check the Residence Act of 1790.


That was rendered moot when DC was given home rule in 1968.
They are running their own city now. Personally I think we would all
be better off if they ceded it back to Maryland, only keeping the
Federal Triangle where the national monuments, capitol, white house
and the majority of federal buildings lie.

That would make it much easier for the MoCo PoPo and the PGCo PoPo. They
wouldn't have to have a DC PoPo riding with them in order to chase
criminals across the DC line.


Hey, hey, hey! Why you callin' them PoPo... krause says only dirtbags
say that? LOL!


....quod erat demonstrandum

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

On 12/28/12 12:11 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 14:54:21 -0500, ESAD wrote:

On 12/27/12 2:41 PM, wrote:

Critical mass? You mean population? D.C. has about the same population
as Alaska, Vermont, and North Dakota though, obviously, much smaller
geographic area.

D.C. doesn't want to be part of another state. It wants its own
political clout and independence.

Alaska and North Dakota have natural resources and a real economy. DC
just sucks on the government tit. The federal government is the only
industry they have. A lot of that is moving north to the I-270
corridor. The biggest industry downtown is K street. (essentially
legal bribery)


So what?

The right wing NRA types won't like this!!
 

In article ,
says...

On 12/28/12 12:11 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 14:54:21 -0500, ESAD wrote:

On 12/27/12 2:41 PM, wrote:

Critical mass? You mean population? D.C. has about the same population
as Alaska, Vermont, and North Dakota though, obviously, much smaller
geographic area.

D.C. doesn't want to be part of another state. It wants its own
political clout and independence.

Alaska and North Dakota have natural resources and a real economy. DC
just sucks on the government tit. The federal government is the only
industry they have. A lot of that is moving north to the I-270
corridor. The biggest industry downtown is K street. (essentially
legal bribery)


So what?

What does DC have to offer the US in the form of revenue and expansion?