House votes to ease DC gun restrictions
Lawyer Blogs
The pro-gun majority in the House moved Wednesday to compel the nation's capital to broaden the rights of its residents to buy and own firearms, including semiautomatic weapons.
Critics, led by the District of Columbia's sole delegate to Congress, decried the action. They said the vote tramples on the District's right to govern itself and could endanger both residents and political dignitaries who often travel across the city.
But the National Rifle Association-backed bill passed easily, 266-152, with supporters saying they were determined to give D.C. residents the same Second Amendment right of self-defense that has been available to other Americans.
Many of those speaking for the bill in debate that went well into the night Tuesday were conservative Democrats from rural districts who strongly support gun rights. Eighty-five Democrats voted for the bill.
"Number one, I'm a pro-gun Democrat," said Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark. "Number 2, if the government of the District of Columbia can take your guns away from you in our nation's capital, Prescott, Arkansas, and many other small towns across the country could be next."
The legislation is unlikely to be taken up in the Senate in the few remaining weeks of this session, but it served both to give lawmakers a pro-gun vote shortly before the election and to demonstrate the NRA's continuing political clout.
Related listings
-
Defense says O.J. middleman may testify Tuesday
Lawyer Blogs 09/16/2008Lawyers for O.J. Simpson were expecting to take another crack at cross-examining an alleged robbery-kidnapping victim after his first time on the stand was cut short by illness.On Tuesday, the court expected to call Bruce Fromong again and perhaps se...
-
Reputed Miss. Klansman may soon walk out of prison
Lawyer Blogs 09/11/2008Attorneys said Wednesday they are working to free a reputed Ku Klux Klansman after a federal appeals court overturned the three life sentences he was serving for the 1964 abduction of two black teenagers who died after being beaten and thrown in the ...
-
US appeals court OKs Facenda suit against NFL
Lawyer Blogs 09/10/2008A U.S. appeals court says the son of legendary football announcer John Facenda can sue NFL Films over the use of his father's voice.The suit stems from the brief use of his late father's voice in a show about a John Madden video game. Facenda's contr...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.