Newly elected Republican Congresswoman/high school dropout vows to carry handgun to Congress

Didn't she own a gun-themed coffeeshop? (The concept makes me laugh, but never mind.) She'll be a one-term Congressperson following in the footsteps of the other Hairdos, Palin and Bachmann; it's not a career choice, it's a marketing move. Endorsements, talk shows, the rubber-chicken circuit. Maybe she hyping for Carolyn Meadows's job.

She’s been arrested four times, she’s under investigation for giving a minor a handgun at her coffee shop, and she was with her husband when he was arrested for revealing his penis to a minor child.

A real model of virtue and law abiding gun ownership....

/thread

Interesting article about the perks members of the Swedish government have, basically none: https://mg.co.za/article/2019-05-31-00-no-perks-for-swedish-mps/

Why do you perceive that I'm fighting with you?

Why do you think you aren't? Have you been sucking on OF's kool aid IV?

Because stating facts is not "fighting" - unless you're OF.

Well, that post didn't age very well...

What did I miss?

Ohhh, never mind.

Serendipity of my post aside it is possible that this woman and today's events are both aspects of a wider phenomenon.

Can't help wondering where she is at this moment. Cowering under her desk ?

inside the capitol building?

No, they don't.

we had a lone armed nutter attack our parliament a few years back. He was taken out by the one guy who is allowed to carry a revolver.

How many times did he reload?

not as many as an NYC cop?

also :selffaceplam:

As if carrying a gun to Congress isn't bad enough, she live tweeted the whereabouts of the Democratic congress people to ... everyone, including the people the rioters were looking to harm.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/progr...weeting-nancy-pelosis-location-to-terrorists/

Makes you wonder why she chose to carry that gun in.

Was it the broader attention grabbing statement we all thought?

Was it a visual catalyst to the riots?

Did she at any point consider using it?

If so, upon whom?

Oh, I'm absolutely certain she intended to use it. On whom and when is the question.

I'm inclined to agree.

Initially I saw it as a publicity stunt from a political chancer of no substance.

In light of subsequent events her motivations are looking more sinister.

Will Trump give her a preemptive pardon?

a bunch of the hard right fuckers defied the metal detector tonight, including Maniac Boepert.

The new rules have fines for going without a mask in the chambers, needs to be one for this too - and enough offenses results in expulsion.

Goddamn Republican Party is just full-throated evil at this point, a few sane individuals notwithstanding.

The only issue I'd take with that is the idea of councillors not earning a salary. Councillors here are in much the same position, they receive expenses only.

I'm all for the public sector being held accountable and heavily regulated, but unpaid government roles are at least a partially closed shop.

Undoubtedly the demand for such roles is low anyway and the majority taking them up are doing so out of a sense of public spirit, but no pay at all means a portion of the potential candidates will be forced out of the running on financial grounds. If you have to choose between a paying role and a voluntary one (even part time) because you lack means then there's still a degree of inequality, ironically excluding the very people this line of thinking is intended to empower.

This is why, at a higher level, our MPs are paid a salary. For a long time the position was unpaid, the advantages being the prestige, influence and connections one made in office. Whilst that might sound egalitarian in one sense it effectively excluded anyone who lacked the financial means to go unpaid, living a lot of the year in London, for their full time occupation.

Those without massive disposable incomes and/or family money need not apply, which for much of our history (especially under the Empire) meant 99 per cent of the population.

I guess they are looking at her as a potential assassin now considering her post, and that gun is not going to be allowed anywhere near the president or vice president because they will have metal detectors.

If you keep guns out of the secured area you will have less ability for a person to shoot someone important.

Oh. My. God. I hadn't even considered that. If that is the case, she needs to be in prison, not Congress.

To be honest I thought that's what we were discussing

You see spot, this is america. We arm our village idiots and loonies. They are allowed to run around with guns because it would make people like @oldfella1962 sad if they were to be told no. That is really the point, it is just about tewlling them no and it making them feel bad. that is why we arm the paranoid delusional people to the teeth.

Can we all say thank you @Forbin our present guntard champion.

I was just thinking she would use it for leverage once her side started winning. I had no idea she would contemplate murder. Maybe I'm just naive.

Or I'm cynical

That's a great point. When Hillsborough County, Florida enacted a new charter back in the 80s one of the debates was over how much to pay commissioners. A civil rights leader argued that they needed to be paid well enough to make them less susceptible to bribery. It made sense to me then and does now. Of course, Hillsborough County is larger than Rhode Island and is one of the fastest growing counties in Florida so the responsibilities and potential expenses that go with being a commissioner are quite large. That hasn't prevented the pave-it-over-and-build-it-up types from dominating the board (up until the last election when Democrats won a majority) but there haven't been perp walks of corrupt commissioners leading the 6 o'clock news after they were caught with bags full of cash bribes either.

You would probably see the good side of a concentration camp. Just sayin you have a little to positive view of the human race.

Oh, how you misjudge me!