Insty points to a blurb in regards to the Webb gun incident:
The reporter therefore asked, “Do you, senator, feel that you are above Washington, D.C.’s gun law?” Webb replied: “I’m not going to comment in any level in terms of how I provide for my own security.”
Truth be told, I wouldn’t answer this question either, and I don’t blame Webb for not answering it.  You never tell people when you are or aren’t carrying. An appropriate response to a question along those lines is “None of your damned business,” so I think Webb’s comment in this regard is fine by me. I would like him to be more forthcoming about how his aide ended up with the gun and whether it was his gun. But I don’t believe he needs to answer questions about where and when he may or may not carry his side arm. That’s his business, and he has good reasons for keeping it that way.
The question is very relevant indeed.
Put another way:
“Do you flaunt the DC firearms laws by carrying and expect to held to a different standard than the little people?”
“I refuse to confirm I am a law abiding citizen. Feel free to assume I break the law regularly and get away with it because I’m Mr. Big from Va in the beltway.”
Sorry, if he carries within DC he is breaking the law. Unless it is in a locked box in his vehicle. His response translates to me as:
“I’m held to a different standard, unlike you little people, now go away while I leave my aide with his butt swinging in the wind.”
He is just another Fieinstein in this regard (sadly) where he gets to do something others cannot.
I think that’s pretty incident dependent. I’m not happy with Webb for being less than forthcoming about the specifics of the incident. I do think the public has a right to know how his aide ended up with a gun in the capitol. But I don’t agree that Jim Webb needs to make his personal security public business. If he gets caught packing in DC, then expects to be let off because he’s Mr. Senator from Virginia, then I’ll condemn him. But if he’s carrying in DC because he views it as prudent, then I have no problem, as long as he is willing to accept the consequences of getting caught.
I’m not going to say whether I’ve ever carried illegally before, even if I have. I can’t expect Webb to reveal something to me I wouldn’t reveal myself. The more details come out, the less pissed I am about the whole thing, because it looks more like it was a legitimate mixup, rather than the Senator deliberately breaking the law, getting caught, then trying to weasel out of whatever punishment would be meted out to the rest of us.
Why does the public have any right to know? And why would someone think any assumed public right to know trumps his aides right to a fair trial?
My takeaway from everything Webb has said is simply that his longtime friend and trusted aide is facing a criminal charge and he’s not saying anything, at all, in public that in any way will prejudice his friend and aide’s ability to present the best possible defense.
Sorry, but there is no right to know anything until after the criminal trial is over. ANd, I hardly thought he was distinguishing himself from the little people. In fact, he seemed to say to me that he didn’t recieve adequate security and like anyone else that the 2nd amendment applied to, he was taking the situation in his own hands.
Good for him!
Senator Webb is not Mr. Joe Average. If it were Mr Joe Average I would agree with you.
But there are branchs of the executive that spend a lot of time and money monitoring threats to the likes of Mr. Webb. And he is a very public figure, by his own choice. He can get police escorts and the like that neither you nor I can get.
I hold these people to a much higher standard than Mr. Joe Average.
Right now Webb is at the center of a firearms related issue. He is a Senator, a man who can wield significant power anmd influence.
He needs to come clean and state he abides by the law. If he cannot state that he abides by the law then he is, by definition, an untrustworthy scuzzball of a politician, although the department of redundancy department says that is a redundant statement these days.
I’m not saying that he needs to say if he carries or not, merely that he abides by the relevant laws. Why is that so hard?
If he wants a break, he should not have sought the power of official office. It is just another sign of “you are little people, I am not” syndrome that haunts the corridors of power.
Countertop makes a good point that I’m inclined to agree with. I’ll retreat from my previous statement.
I’m not saying that he needs to say if he carries or not, merely that he abides by the relevant laws. Why is that so hard?
Because by saying that, he’d be telling everyone he’s defenseless in Washington DC. If I were a public figure of some prominence, you can bet I’d want to keep everyone guessing that I might just be packing illegally in places like DC and New Jersey.
The fact that I think DC’s and New Jersey’s gun laws are largely unconstitutional also adds to my belief that Webb is in his right not to talk about it.
The problem is that he avoided the question by knocking down a strawman.
The reporter didn’t ask him “exactly when and where do you carry a firearm?”
He didn’t ask him anything related to the aide’s court case.
He asked him “do you feel that you are above the law?”
That is a relevant question. Our elected officials are supposed to be public servants. Representatives OF and FROM the people. Not monarchs and not “like us only better”.
Any time congress exempts themselves from a law that applies to everyone else, they are establishing themselves as tyrants, not citizen legislators.
Heck, I’d pass all kinds of laws if I could make them inapplicable to me. For example: It is hereby illegal for anyone (except for me) to drive in the left hand lane of any multi-lane road…but I digress.
The question, when framed in blunt terms and not couched in political correctness was: “Mr. Webb, are you a tyrant?”
I’d like to know the answer to that one myself. Mr. Webb is perfectly welcome to continue carrying his firearm wherever and whenever he pleases as far as I’m concerned…as long as every other citizen is afforded the same right. If It is illegal for me (or for his aide for that matter), then it should be equally illegal for him. If it is not, and if he believes that that state of affairs is well and good, then Houston, we have a problem.
I moved to Idaho a couple yrs ago form California largely( but not solely) to exercise, to some extent, my 2nd amendment rights. In California I felt completly vulnerable, both from crimnals and the state. I could not (under Calif law) legally carry and felt the only way to properly protect myself and my family was to carry. When I arrived here I went thru the process, very streamlined, to aquire ‘permission’ to exercise my right without the daily fear of ending up in the slam. Funny but here, were crime is low we carry but in California you have to really know someone and if your just an average citizen, forget it..you wont get the ‘permission’. Even here though, it pisses me off thinking I have to, as an adult, as an American ‘ask’, like a child begging a parent to do something as basic as protect myself. As far as Im concerned, its pure bu!!sh!t/ I cant stand the condescending attitude that I have met from ‘law enforcement’ and the like. I spent alot of time at the range over the past 15 yrs and I can say that cops cant shoot worth a crap, have horrible gun handling skills and are in no position to be supervising others in that regard. As far as Webb giving the answer he did, if its in the same context, good. If he doesnt defend MY right to do the same though, then screw him. We need to work tirelessly to repeal ALL gun laws. They are,as far as Im concerned null and void.