National Capital Security and Safety Act

NATIONAL CAPITAL SECURITY AND SAFETY ACT -- (House of Representatives - September 16, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TANNER. I thank the gentleman.

We're here tonight, not because we've asked for a vote but because the Supreme Court, in a recent decision, changed the law of the land or at least clarified what the law of the land is with respect to the second amendment. It could be about almost any subject. We routinely come here after the Supreme Court decides what the law of the land is on a justiciable issue, and we enact, implementing legislation whether its on people in Tennessee or in Mississippi or in Oregon or in Washington State or in the District of Columbia. That's done routinely over and over again. The subject happens to be the second amendment in this most recent Supreme Court decision. It could be about anything.

Nobody disputes the fact that the District of Columbia has every right to make its own laws. What we do dispute is that the District of Columbia does not have the right, nor does any other American citizen, to ignore the law of the land. The law of the land, as enunciated in a recent Supreme Court decision, whether one agrees or disagrees, grants to individual citizens the right to bear arms legally. The District has failed to implement that decision, and therefore, we are here tonight.

This Childers substitute does nothing more nor nothing less than implement the bare minimum that the Supreme Court said was the law of the land. Whether you like it or not, that is the law of the land when the Supreme Court decides a justiciable issue.

This legislation, the Childers substitute, does not in any way limit the authority of the District or the ability of independent authorities in the District to restrict firearm possession. It does not repeal the D.C. law banning a person from the possession of ammunition. It does not amend the D.C. definition of ``restricted pistol bullets.'' It does not repeal the D.C. law providing for strict liability for handgun manufacturers.

Quite frankly, many of us live in the District for most of the year now because of our job requirements. I don't want to impose on the District, but I do say this:

The District, just like people all over the rest of America, has to implement legislation when the Supreme Court speaks. That's why we're here, not because we asked for this. I, quite frankly, enjoy living in the District and enjoy having the District make the laws that we live under here, but like no other citizen, the District is no different in that they cannot ignore the law of the land even if they disagree with it as cannot the citizens of my State or of any other State.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source