Imagine that a U.S. congressman got up early in the morning, pinned a Glock pistol to his waist, crossed the streets of the capital Washington, D.C., and rushed to Capitol Hill, the national political center, to start a day’s work.
Lauren Boebert, a 33-year-old Republican-elect representative of Colorado, has applied to Capitol Hill Police to allow her to hold a gun there. Police have not responded to her request, but reports that “more than one House of Representatives went to work with a gun.”
Under congressional rules decades ago, members can “go to work with guns” but with some restrictions. The public is prohibited from carrying weapons into the Capitol, the Capitol and the office building.
According to the Associated Press, Bout is a highly-voiced gun activist. Previously, she attracted a lot of attention for hanging a Glock pistol on her hip.’
Buport is not the only congressman with guns on duty. According to the report, after she was sworn in in January this year, she could be “gunned” like many of the Houses on Capitol Hill.
After the New York Post (NYP) reported the news, Buport himself retweeted the news on Twitter and commented that “the Constitution gives us the right to hold guns, even where this basic principle is opposed.”
As of press time, Capitol Hill Police spokesman Eva Malecki has not responded to Bout’s request to the Capitol Hill or the Associated Press.
A 1967 statute reportedly states that neither federal nor D.S. law “can prohibit senators from holding guns in office areas” or “holding unloaded or properly disposed with guns while commuting in the Capitol Hill area.”
However, public visitors are not allowed to carry any weapons in the Capitol Hill area.
In 2018, Representative Jared Huffman of California wrote to the Chief of Correction of the House of Representatives (Note: the head of law enforcement of the House to maintain order and security of the House of Representatives), saying, “Under the relevant regulations, representatives cannot hold guns in and near the building of the House of Congress. But their assistants can help them carry their weapons in the Capitol Hill area.”
Hoffman recently said his colleagues (some of the House of Representatives) and their staff were carrying guns on Capitol Hill “all day” but did not name them.” Representatives don’t care even if they put a loaded AK47 on the table,” he said.
In addition, Hoffman also revealed that when a congressman enters a congressional building, he does not need to pass through security checks on Capitol Hill.” No one investigates,” he said.
When Democrats on the House Executive Committee asked how many members of Congress were carrying guns in 2018, Capitol Hill police did not respond directly, saying in a written response that they were “knowing” of the investigation into carrying weapons, according to the Associated Press. The reply added that “there is no fixed requirement” that when lawmakers carry guns in the Capitol, they must be notified that the regulations require safe storage of weapons, but “this responsibility belongs to members of Congress.”
Marjorie Taylor Greene, also elected Republican politician, expressed solidarity with Buport. According to the Capitol Hill, both have publicly supported the far-right conspiracy theory organization “Q Anonymous” (QAnon).
“I’m not just supporting the congressman’s possession of a gun, I believe it’s every American right,” Green said. “I’ll work every day [hard] until all regions repeal the rules that prohibit gun possession.”
It is worth mentioning that Buport also owns a rifle-themed restaurant in her hometown in Colorado.
Buport defeated five-time co-district Rep. Scott Tipton in the Republican primary, when her campaign strategy was to accuse the other party of “not giving Trump enough support.”
Buport himself is indeed a loyal supporter of Trump. After Trump was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in September, Buffaud tweeted congratulations that “the nomination is well deserved”.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that the Second Amendment (Second Amendment) of the U.S. Constitution, which simply summarizes it as “protecting citizens’ right to bear guns” is not very accurate.
Its law was originally written as “A free country must rely on well-disciplined militia forces, so the people cannot be prevented from possessing and carrying weapons.”
Gun-owned parties and interest groups in the United States emphasize the second half, while the camp advocating the abolition of guns emphasizes the first half, believing that “only militias have the right to hold guns”.
A large number of lawsuits have occurred in the United States over 100 years around this “fuzzy” legal provision, such as District of Columbia v. Heller. At the same time, the issue of firearms has become one of the most difficult issues in both parties.