Like Maryland, California, and the District of Columbia, New York’s firearm permitting approval requires that applicants must provide good cause to carry a firearm. The laws surrounding New York City’s firearm issuing authority have been criticized in the past for favoring retired police officers or those with the right connections within the police department to get a concealed carry permit. The 37,000 issued licensees include prominent business leaders, elected officials, journalists, judges and attorneys. What about Rangel’s own constituents in his Harlem district? Should law-abiding residents who live there have concealed carry permits too? “I wouldn’t want them to have it. I know what you’re trying to say. Corruption is corruption, and it’s bad,” Rangel said. “Law-abiding citizens just shouldn’t have to carry a gun. You’re not gonna push me in that direction,” he said, standing just five feet from a Capitol Police officer, who stood at his post by the House Speaker’s Lobby.
There are TWO issues at stake in this New York controversy, and Representative Rangel knows it.
When asked by The Daily Caller his thoughts on the difficulty of getting a concealed carry permit in New York City and how rare it is for such permits to be issued by the NYPD, Rangel replied, “I’m glad to hear you say that very few people get it.”
Can we say "Mister and Mrs America, turn them all in?"
Frankly, if I was one of Mrl. Rangel's constituents, I would be all about the "Anybody But Rangel" movement.
Issue 1.5 is:
Gee, Charly, where are you ... New Haven? No, you're not. You're in New York, and you didn't know that people bribe cops to get guns?
The SECOND ISSUE is that Charly sincerely believes:
"Law Abiding Citizens Shouldn't Have To Carry A Gun"
Can't argue with that, except ... well, as long as there are muggers and murderers in the neighborhood, I think I would feel a lot better if I were "ALLOWED" to do so. You know .. as a law-abiding citizen, and all that?
But if you live 'there', and your representative is 'him', you're pretty much screwed; unless you want to get a gun 'anyhow' ... so badly that you (an otherwise honest citizen) is willing to risk Jail Time in order to find the means to defend himself and his family.
You think that's BAD, Charly? Maybe you should put yourself in THEIR place!.
SO, if your constituents feel that they are at risk' and they can't get a gun legally ... they'll get a gun by 'other means'. While you MAY think you're protecting them, by taking away their means to protect theselves, you are actually putting them at greater risk of predation from the guys who do NOT obey they law and are already armed.
.. does that make sense to you, Charley?
Great representation; deliberately making criminals from honest citizens.
Way to GO, CHARLY!!!!!
(You SO rock! And don't mind that you won't let us defend ourselves against drug dealers, aggressive teens, and other folks who think we don't have the balls to defend ourselves: ... it's not important in the Liberal scheme of things!)The Teapot Dome scandal was a bribery incident that took place in the United States from 1921 to 1922, during the administration of President Warren G. Harding. Secretary of the Interior
“We don’t need that many guns,” he continued. “I didn’t know that briberies were involved in getting a gun, and that is wrong, but overall, if it is difficult to get a concealed weapon permit, I’m glad to hear that.”
As far as I know, it has absolutely nothing to do with Charly Rnagal or the Daily Caller. Or Charleys' constituents, for all I know.l
But it does help to jazz up the headline.