Senior Claire Autruong, The Hatchet’s fall 2008 opinions editor, argues that the fight for the D.C. vote should not be connected to gun legislation.
“nder no circumstances should District residents accept a D.C. Voting Rights Act with the gun amendment attached to it. What is the point of gaining a voting representative at the cost of being able to legislate D.C.’s own gun laws?”
Commentary from the opinions editors, op-ed columnists and The Hatchet's Editorial Board
Director of the GW Institute for Nanotechnology Michael Keidar spent the last three years developing a cancer cell-killing medical device that he said could revolutionize the disease’s treatment worldwide.
The problem with growing up is that there is always someone telling us we are not old enough. And yet, you would think that as young adults, we would finally be over it.
What’s not to love about graduation season? It is filled with senior send-offs, family get-togethers and free food.
GWids are the equivalent of students’ social security numbers on campus.
Transfer students do not enroll at GW for the Mount Vernon Campus experience. They come here to take advantage of city life in Foggy Bottom.
As camera flashes flickered over a sea of tassels, two Columbian College of Arts and Science professors urged graduates to cast their fears aside and forge fresh paths to success.
I never understood why people refer to cities as if they were human until I left Sevilla, Spain. My feelings toward leaving my newfound home are so complex, it's as if I am leaving the love of my life.
Vol. 109
An Independent Student Newspaper
Serving The George Washington University Community Since 1904
“What is the point of gaining a voting representative at the cost of being able to legislate D.C.’s own gun laws?””
What a ridiculous statement. This article only makes sense to those who believe that gun laws are the only important thing that a local government does.
It misses the point entirely. Gun rights are protected by the second amendment (… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, anyone?), and we should not be using our own views on gun control as a litmus test for supporting a VOTING RIGHTS BILL.
How very selfish of the author to argue that DC residents should continue even another minute going unrepresented in congress because she favors gun control.
Hey Logan, thanks for the comment, but I think it misses my point as well.
I am completely in favor of bringing D.C.’s laws into compliance with the Second Amendment and the Heller ruling, as the Ensign amendment aims to do. I also completely agree with you that we should not be using gun control as a “litmus test” for voting rights – which is why I argue that the two should be completely separated. In the editorial I state that combining the two into one bill is a “disservice” to both issues, and I stand by that.
Councilmembers Mendelson and Cheh, and Del. Norton, currently hold this position as well, though Mayor Fenty agrees with you that the vote should be had at any cost.
It should be an interesting debate either way.
We can debate whether gun provisions SHOULD be in the bill.
But the fact is that they ARE, and saying that for that reason alone, DC voting rights should be delayed shows a condescending view towards DC residents, that their right to have a voting member in congress is less important to you than gun control.
Thanks for responding though =). Always nice to have authors defending their pieces.
Hmmm. From the menu of Inalienable Rights, pick one. “You can’t Always Get What you Want.” You may (or may not) have a fraction of Representation, provided you eat the whole Arms thing first.
Somebody please look up the meaning of inalienable?