Heller Attempts to Register Gun; Denied - Heller 2.0 on the way!

LanceOregon

Moderator
Heller announced today that he will sue the city of Washington DC once again over its new firearms laws. I wonder if this can be expedited in any way through the court system? Or will it again take many years?

Here is a photo taken of Heller:


hellerx-large.jpg



Here are links to news stories about this:

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/07/dc-refuses-to-r.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-07-17-gun-ban_N.htm


I had thought that semiauto pistols were going to be allowed under the new law, but apparently not. The city refused to register Heller's semiauto handgun.

Moderators Note: LanceOregon and ammoeater both posted the same info at the same time. Threads merged with new title. - Antipitas
 
Neither Heller nor his attorney seemed upset by the delay.
I think they got what they wanted. They wanted to make a public display of how ridiculous the new rules are to build a case for further legal action. I also think they wanted to force the powers to be to go on record as saying "it is okay to bring legally owned firearms into the city to register them."
 
I would think this would move quicker too but who knows. I have a feeling that this may set the tone for what "restrictions" may be put in place on firearm owners in the future.
 
This one will move much faster.

Don't expect this to reach the Supreme Court. Since the D.C. Circuits ruling was affirmed by the SCOTUS, that's as far as it will go. That's assuming it will go that far. I suspect that the District Court will uphold the ruling.
 
This one will move much faster.

Don't expect this to reach the Supreme Court. Since the D.C. Circuits ruling was affirmed by the SCOTUS, that's as far as it will go. That's assuming it will go that far. I suspect that the District Court will uphold the ruling.

Were I Gura, I would take the opportunity of a more expansive challenge. Since this is a new law, he should not be limited to the challenges he raised to the prior law, which would leave him free to challenge the "bear" issue.

If that is the case, the Supremes may see it again.
 
I know I'm talking to the choir here. Heller and all the individuals which support him in the quest to fight for second amendment rights for all of us should be roundly commended for their unselfish efforts to see justice prevail.
 
The "amnesty" that the DC government promulgated only applies to handguns transported DIRECTLY from HOME to the MPD registration department. If your gun is stored outside of DC, then the amnesty does not apply, since there is no way to transport a handgun DIRECTLY from HOME to the MPD if the handgun is not in your home already.

I suspect that the DC police are attempting to set up Heller so that they can arrest him for possession of an unregistered handgun, then cuff him and stuff him into a urine-soaked concrete cell in order to make themselves feel better about the situation.

Sure, the police told him that it's "no problem" to transport the gun from Maryland, but the US Supreme Court has ruled that it's okay for police to lie in the line of duty.

Unless they publish a written modification of the amnesty provisions, I wouldn't trust them in any way, not one single iota.
 
HMMM.

While I might sometimes believe the government is out to get you, one really hopes they aren't THAT stupid. Heller's attorney should have written authorization.

The strength, in the past of such laws is they are difficult to get standing to enforce. If the law is never enforced, it exists, and, law abiding people obey it. Arresting Heller would give him standing, big time, and, would REALLY piss off, or worse, the entire judicial system. It might also unite the American people, on the 2A, and, since D.C. is under congressional review, a massive writing campaign could actually make Congress get of their arse, and address the problem. Federal charges can be brought by the Attorney General for obstruction of justice, abuse of office, all kinds of fun stuff.

Anyone know where the A.G. for the area fits in this? Conservative, law abiding, super hippy????

I do know the Federal enforcement agencies were out to get Marion Barry, pretty much framed him, and, ended up with minimal charge conviction. However, he knew they were around, and, perhaps Fenty is counting on that not happening to him???

I'm 3000 miles away, and, don't know much about D.C. legal politics...
Well, forget the AG's office doing it's job:

The District of Columbia v. Heller

After the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit in March 2007 held that the District’s longstanding ban on private possession of handguns in the District violates the Second Amendment, Mayor Adrian M. Fenty requested that Attorney General Linda Singer’s office prepare a brief asking the US Supreme Court to overturn that ruling and uphold the well-supported judgment of the District government that the ban saves lives and is fully constitutional. On September 4, 2007, the District filed a petition for certiorari asking the US Supreme Court to review that March 2007 decision. On November 20, 2007, the US Supreme Court granted the District’s petition and announced that it would hear the case. The District’s brief is now due on January 4, 2008. Briefing will continue for the next two months, and oral argument is expected in mid-March 2008.

As the District’s petition explained, the District believes the DC Circuit’s decision was incorrect on the law, and we hope the Supreme Court will agree with us. There are three basic reasons why the District’s ban on handguns does not violate the Second Amendment.

* First, as the overwhelming majority of circuit decisions conclude, the text and history of the Second Amendment establish that it protects weapons possession and use only in connection with service in state-regulated militias. That conclusion is supported by United States v. Miller, 307 US 174 (1939), in which the Supreme Court unanimously directed that the Second Amendment “must be interpreted and applied” in view of its “obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such [militia] forces.”
* Second, even if there is a right to possess and use weapons unrelated to militia service, the Second Amendment restricts only federal interference with state-regulated militias and state-recognized gun rights. Legislation enacted by the District does not implicate the Amendment.
* Third, in any event, the District law at issue in this case does not infringe whatever right the Second Amendment could be read to protect, because it is eminently reasonable to permit private ownership of other types of weapons, including shotguns and rifles, but ban the easily concealed and uniquely dangerous modern handgun.

In short, the DC Circuit’s decision was in conflict with nearly every other federal circuit court in the country, and wrong on the law. Indeed, this is the first time in the nation’s history that any appellate court has overturned a gun law under the Second Amendment.

So far we have had amicus briefs supporting us filed by a group of states led by New York and including Hawaii, Illinois and Maryland and by a group of children’s advocates including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Defense Fund. Because of the importance of the case, we expect to have more states and cities and many more private groups providing support at the Supreme Court level.
http://occ.dc.gov/occ/cwp/view,a,1224,q,638669,occNav,|31692|,.asp
 
While I might sometimes believe the government is out to get you, one really hopes they aren't THAT stupid.
Remember, we're talking about people who think that "keep" doesn't mean "own," and "bear" doesn't mean "carry," and who think that they can ban all semi-auto pistols, including the standard-issue sidearm of the US military, in spite of having been defeated in the US Supreme Court.
 
Just how much faster is faster? A month? Two? A year?
I would like some kind of resolution that involved Fenty and Co. arrested by US Marshalls for violating a court order -- preferably with some jail-time involved. That should happen fairly quickly (within days) if it's gonna.

I'm not holding my breath.
 
I have said it before, and I will say it again, I feel that the politicians and city council members that try these lame attempts to circumvent the law (knowing full well it is just a temporary stall tactic that will cost millions of dollars in tax payers money to defend in court) should be held accountable for the financial costs.
 
Is everyone here positive that the Heller ruling makes it plain that there's a right to own semi-auto handguns?

I read through the ruling and that particular point is not at all obvious to me...
 
The politicians in DC must not be too bright (which seems like a good thing for us). I'd think they'd just cut their losses and give Heller what he want to shut him up rather than risk losing another case before SCOTUS. It's almost as if they're trying to open the door to get more of their idiotic laws struck down or repealed. I mean honestly, if it were someone who doesn't seem to have the resources to fight it then I might be able to see them trying to obstruct it but for goodness sake the guy's already taken it all the way once.
 
Reported tonight ABC radio news 9pm pst...

...Heller was refused because he didn't bring his handgun with him. The first handgun registration application was a grandmother, who's handgun was carried into the building by the police, in a camoflage purse. It will be test fired by the police, and if she passes the written test and then the background check, and pays the fee, she will be allowed to keep it in her home, unloaded and locked, except in case of emergency.

Now, I have to wonder about a couple of things. First, note the bureaucratic efficiency in giving the written test (which I assume there will be a fee for) before the background check. Also, the news made no mention of revolver or autopistol, only referring to a "handgun".

I would love to see a copy of the written test. I wonder what questions it asks, and in how many languages? Please, someone out there with more knowledge and ability about these things than I have, please get a valid (and legal) copy of the test and post it for us to view.
 
she will be allowed to keep it in her home, unloaded and locked, except in case of emergency.

I'd like to know just what constitutes an emergency. Sounds to me like it'd be illegal for her to load it an put it in the nightstand or under her pillow before she goes to bed. Or does this just mean that she has to keep it unloaded and locked up when she's not home? Sounds sucspiciously vauge to me.
 
Back
Top