Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.) reportedly plans to introduce legislation that would make it a federal crime to use language or symbols that COULD BE PERCEIVED as threatening or inciting violence against a federal official or member of Congress.
Brady told CNN that he wants federal lawmakers and officials to have the same protections against threats currently provided to the president. His call came one day after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) was shot, along with 19 other people, at a public event in Tucson. A suspect is currently in custody.
"The president is a federal official," Brady told CNN in a telephone interview. "You can't do it to him; you should not be able to do it to a congressman, senator or federal judge."
Among the six people killed was Federal Judge John Roll.
While it is unknown at this time whether the shooter was politically motivated, that has not prevented a vigorous debate about whether heated political rhetoric seen during the healthcare reform debate and during the 2010 campaign is inciting violence.
"The rhetoric is just ramped up so negatively, so high, that we have got to shut this down," Brady said.
More here
["Never let a crisis go to waste."-- Rahm Emanuel]
Brady told CNN that he wants federal lawmakers and officials to have the same protections against threats currently provided to the president. His call came one day after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) was shot, along with 19 other people, at a public event in Tucson. A suspect is currently in custody.
"The president is a federal official," Brady told CNN in a telephone interview. "You can't do it to him; you should not be able to do it to a congressman, senator or federal judge."
Among the six people killed was Federal Judge John Roll.
While it is unknown at this time whether the shooter was politically motivated, that has not prevented a vigorous debate about whether heated political rhetoric seen during the healthcare reform debate and during the 2010 campaign is inciting violence.
"The rhetoric is just ramped up so negatively, so high, that we have got to shut this down," Brady said.
More here
["Never let a crisis go to waste."-- Rahm Emanuel]
10 comments:
voting nondemocratic could be concidered a threat?
I hope we see a public outcry for re instituting the ban on assault riffles. Had that ban not been allowed to expire under bush he would have had 15 rounds, not 33.
you do the math.
Divorce this idea from the emotion of the last few days, and it becomes nothing more than another attempt to empower the Thought Police.
"Could be perceived.." by whom?
So any little case of the heebie jeebies can generate a felony charge?
Let's stay with reality-- the shooter was/is nuts.
There are plenty of laws on the books already to deal with threats.
yes he is clearly nuts- so WHY under federal and Arizona law was he able to legally obtain a firearm with two extended mags?!
we have a broken system- there is NO REASON outside of murdering another person that a 33 round clip even needs to exist.
AMEN 10:41
Im a LIFE LONG member of the NRA and a war vet- there are two kinds of guns on this earth- ones for SPROT/PROTECTION and ones for WAR/DEATH/MURDER
Ive seen both in action and the ones people use to murder innocent people in this country are always from the later group.
as someone who has seen almost every phase of gun control in America i can tell you we need to take an honest look at what kind of fire arms we make available to civilians.
anyone who was allowed to carry would have ended it before it was too bad.
and yes, a 32 round magazine is needed to defend against a murdering crowd or one nut meaning to do harm.
more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens is the answer, not more gun controlling measures.
Wow yet another way of forcing The Police State on America.... Soon it will be illegal to breath or go to the bathroom as some stupid Liberal will say its hurting a fly or fish in a swamp in the middle of some place that nobody cares about.... Liberal Dems are out for one thing and that is to remove your liberty at whatever cost and then have them tell you its for your own good.
The Dems have alot to be fearful of and its a good thing as you can only step on the people for so long
11:52
Arizona's carry laws are among the least restrictive in the nation. Still didn't help in this case, did it?
10:53....the second amendment was intended to make sure the citizenry could resist the authority of an overbearing and too powerful central (federal) government. A disarmed population can't offer much resistance. EVERY dictatorship and EVERY tyrant wants two things IMMEDIATELY...control of the press/information and a disarmed population. Doesn't make much sense to let the government tell us what kinds of weapons we can have (they already DO, but THAT is another discussion). When incidents like the attack on the Congresswoman occur, lots of people (like you) are ready to put the hammer down on magazine capacity and weapons types, but in my opinion, its just an alarmist reaction. What if he had TWO 9mm's with 16 round clip in each one? Would you then be advocating for a ONE gun limit? Bad things happen sometimes in a free country...and I very sorry that this happened, especially for the child. But, think about the larger picture before you start giving away MY rights and realize this --- there are likely millions of people with rifles and pistols with high capacity magazines. And quite a few with automatic weapons. One guy gets crazy and you want EVERYONE to lay down their arms? Its just my view. But I would prefer to have that right than to NOT have it.
So this mean it fine to use language or symbols that COULD BE PERCEIVED as threatening or inciting violence against us ordinary folks ?
Post a Comment