I'm not sure I want to give any "credit" to a politician who "writes", submits, sponsors, gets committee hearings for, and engineers passage of law that he hasn't read nor understands. No, I am sure. I don't want to give him any credit. At all. Unless it's credit for being a tool, a moron a less-than-satisfactory-intellectually-capable legislator and guilty of violating his oath of office to uphold the constitutions.

Holding in common a desired "result" of less crime is no excuse for him/them passing laws that impact law-abiding citizens by denying them their rights and having no effect whatsoever on crime.

Agreed. I also don't think we should be easing up on him, or any other politician for that matter. We ought to make everyone aware that these are the kind of people we are putting into elected office. His claim that he didn't understand what RAP BACK was about is him admitting his incompetence and admitting he can't do his job. And if he just said that to ease his guilty conscience and shift blame, then him pushing this bill is deceitful malfeasance. Either way, this is not the kind of person we should have in office.

Misleading title on that news clip. They mention nothing about "automatic" weapons. Also, the HPD officer recommending we get a big dog is interviewed and apparently in support of the rap-back system.