Summary

H.Res. 40: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are stationed or residing in the District of Columbia should be permitted... Read More

Status

This resolution was introduced on Jan 22, 2013, in a previous session of Congress, but was not passed.

Tags

Date Introduced
Jan 22, 2013

Co-Sponsors

Bill Text

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are stationed or residing in the District of Columbia should be permitted to exercise fully their rights under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Whereas the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: `A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.'; Whereas approximately 40,000 servicemen and women across all branches of the Armed Forces either live in or are stationed on active duty within the Washington, DC metropolitan area, and unless these individuals are granted a waiver as serving in a law enforcement role, they are subject to the District of Columbia's onerous and highly restrictive laws on the possession of firearms; Whereas military personnel, despite being extensively trained in the proper and safe use of firearms, are therefore deprived by the laws of the District of Columbia of handguns, rifles, and shotguns that are commonly kept by law-abiding persons throughout the United States for sporting use and for lawful defense of their persons, homes, businesses, and families; Whereas the District of Columbia has one of the highest per capita murder rates in the Nation, which may be attributed in part to previous local laws prohibiting possession of firearms by law-abiding persons who would have otherwise been able to defend themselves and their loved ones in their own homes and businesses;...

Read Full Text

Sentiment Map

Select:

Nation

1950 Supporting
49 Opposing
98% 2%

State: CA

117 Supporting
4 Opposing
97% 3%

District: 1st

3 Supporting
1 Opposing
75% 25%

Popularity Trend

Organizations Supporting

Armed Citizens United supports this resolution because we believe that servicemen and women have the right to defend themselves both on the battlefield and at home. This Constitutional Right must be enforced.

H.Res. 40 expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are stationed or residing in the District of Columbia should be permitted to exercise fully their rights under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and therefore should be exempt from the District of Columbia's restrictions on the possession of firearms.

Florida Carry 2 years ago

H.Res. 40 expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are stationed or residing in the District of Columbia should be permitted to exercise fully their rights under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and therefore should be exempt from the District of Columbia's restrictions on the possession of firearms.

Organizations Opposing

No organizations opposing yet.

Users Supporting

I support H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because it is there constitutional right to do so and it will lead to a safer society. They have a right to protect themselves while they are protecting and serving our country.

Share
PA
15
nittanylion25
PA-15
9 months ago

I support H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because... it is the right of every American to own and bear arms

Share
IL
2
terry1948
IL-2
10 months ago

I support H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because... I strongly believe that denial of an individual's 2nd Amendment right is wrong and especially troubling when this denial is based on geography. As a veteran I am also troubled knowing that members of the Armed Forces are expected to defend our nation but are disarmed in our nation's capital.

Share
MD
5
CraigR
MD-5
10 months ago

I support H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because self defense is a right, not a privilege or a luxury. Everybody should have the ability to defend themselves, this sounds like a good start to restoring that right in DC.

Share
ME
2
DanInMaine
ME-2
11 months ago

I support H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because...Someone bravely protecting our liberties deserves to have their liberties protected. However, this is not enough. Under the 14th amendment, we all have a right to equal protection under the law. Only allowing military to excercise their rights is the opposite of equal. Do only government employees deserve to defend themselves? EQUAL protection under the law. That means everyone, of every race and gender shall be able to protect themselves!

Share
AZ
1
Concernedcitizen82
AZ-1
11 months ago

I support H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because I'm an active duty military member, stationed 30 miles from D.C. I am one of the military members impacted. However, I don't believe I should have any different set of rights than any other citizens! EVERYONE should have this right!

Share
NY
23
samuelpletts
NY-23
11 months ago

Users Opposing

I oppose H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because... This sets a bad precedent. All law-abiding citizens who could otherwise legally own a firearm should be allowed to own and carry firearms within the District of Columbia.

Share
WA
6
RX-XR
WA-6
10 months ago

I oppose H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because...all citizens should have the right not just active duty military.

Share
TX
31
austinrich
TX-31
11 months ago

I oppose H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because if the District of Columbia's citizens can't do it, what makes the active duty military less dangerous? Or are they more equal than others now?

Share
PA
5
Necrotyrannus
PA-5
11 months ago

I oppose H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because gun use by active duty military should be when they are under the command of an active duty officer and on a mission. When standing down, active duty military should function as the citizens that they are and abide by the laws that prevail. The Heller decision cited resulted in emergency legislation by the District reflecting their immediate and serious concern that the Court abridged important issues of public safety. The District law should not be abridged.

Share
CA
45
Safety
CA-45
1 year ago

I oppose H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because... This bill sets a bad precedent in which a certain class of individuals is exempt from the law. The law should apply to all Americans equally, not singling out a specific group with more individual rights than another. However, I would support this resolution if it included all law-abiding American citizens, not just military personnel. The second amendment should belong to us all.

Share
FL
14
DreamingTao
FL-14
1 year ago

I oppose H.Res. 40 ("Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are") because because I believe the Second Amendment should be repealed.

Share
TX
24
CrabcakeGirl
TX-24
1 year ago

Bill Summary

H.Res. 40: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that active duty military personnel who are stationed or residing in the District of Columbia should be permitted to exercise fully their rights under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

H.Res. 39 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 325) to ensure the comp... H.Res. 41 Expressing support for designation of February 12, 2013, as Darwin Da...