Washington DC Council to Enact Sweeping New Gun Laws Tomorrow

L

LanceOregon

Moderator
Well, it looks like the city of Washington DC is going to thumb their nose at the US Supreme Court tomorrow. For they are passing a long list of new gun laws to impose on the citizens of their city.

Yes, you will be able to register your handgun. However, you have to go through an application process that well may take months. You will have to pass a written test, and provide certification from a doctor of your good vision. You will also have to be fingerprinted, and last, but not at all least, you will have to submit your gun to the authorities to have ballistic tests done on it. No details on what exactly will be done, but the test results will apparently be compared with some existing database, to insure that your gun has never been used in a crime before. That alone will be a rather lengthy process, I would estimate.

If you manage to get through all of this ( the cost of the process has not yet been revealed ), you are then allowed to keep your handgun INSIDE your house. It cannot be taken outside of your dwelling, even if it remains on your own property. In addition, the gun must be stored unloaded, and either have a trigger lock installed, or be disassembled.

Only if there is a "reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm”, will it be legal for you to load your handgun inside your home. Otherwise, having the gun loaded would be a violation.

Is this planned legislation in compliance with the Heller decision??? I wonder...

Here are some news links about these developments:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/14/AR2008071401332.html

http://www.nbc4.com/politics/16876021/detail.html

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/...easonably-perceived-threat-of-immediate-harm/

.
 
You'd think that Bloomberg, Brady, McCarthy and their ilk would tell them to shut the heck up, go shall-issue for residential ownership with police registration and make it a felony to be caught with your gun outside of the home, and be done with it. They're on the losing side of this battle, and the more they fight, the more ground they lose.

If DC gets held in contempt of the Supreme Court it will just create more judgements to use as precedent for our cause, and they lost HARD.

This silly game of semiautomatics somehow being "machine guns" is also going to get them in trouble and probably act as precedent for eliminating magazine capacity restrictions.
 
This isn't in any direct violation of the SCOTUS decision and, as such, would take years to wind its way back through the courts. If it even could. Nah, they'll get away with it and this is the last we'll hear about DC. Afterall, people get to own guns now, right... Think about it. Then project it all across the country and reconsider just how good the Heller decision really is.
 
Did anyone really think that D. C. would just cave and go "Vermont"? I thought it was understood that Heller was only the beginning. A good beginning, but still only a beginning nonetheless.
 
Just remember the registration process no matter how insane will be lawful under Heller as Alan Gura stated that any registration or licensing would be ok as long as it wasn't arbitrary.

So if they require only 20/20 uncorrected vision for their eye exam, that would be lawful
 
Is this planned legislation in compliance with the Heller decision??? I wonder...
Click to expand...
Maybe.

Here's part of the Heller opinion:

Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
They overturned the law because it was ILLEGAL to render a firearm functional in order to defend yourself, but they also overturned it because in the usual time frame which would be associated with a home defense situation, it is IMPOSSIBLE to use a locked, unloaded gun.

The first part of that can't be argued, and they fixed it.

The second part can and will be argued. A well trained person can quickly unlock and load a gun, so it's not altogether impossible to use a locked, unloaded gun for self defense. I prefer to keep mine unlocked and loaded.
 
Sad so sad

to see such an obvious plan to destroy the Heller decision. Most of us will not live to see any challenge to this new BS come before SCOTUS.
 
Could anyone have expected something less than this from a rabidly anti gun group of local politicians. Expect the same from Chicago and any other city with laws similar to DC.

Makes the Heller ruling look like a more minor 'victory' when municipalities eneact laws like this.
 
Shouldn't these socialist thugs be arrested by the FBI and held in supermax general population until the issue is resolved and appropriate charges clear? Ah, what a dream that would be!
 
What is our duty to obey bad faith legislation?

Obviously, this is what is known as a "setup". Indicative of bad faith, on the part of the DC council and mayor.

Similar in nature, only more flagrant than the way the ATF now interprets and enforces many of the gun laws, via their rulemaking authority.

Inexplicably, some gun owners still want to cheer when ATF inflicts its absurd interpretation of the law on some poor sap/fellow gun owner. We see it on this forum. Why?

When the next anti-gun congress and executive are installed we're likely to see more of this cropping up. Bad faith gun laws.

It will be interesting to see to what extent the gun owning community piles on to the next victim who is prosecuted for violating DC's revised statutes... "The law is the law", and demands blind obedience!

Hopefully, more people will see this setup for what it is, and reconsider that position.
 
what I would like to see is a local judge toss their new laws on the trash heap but I really don't think that will happen. what might happen is the 1st appellate court will issue a summery judgment tossing them. they will ask for a stay and that will be denied as they will want a hearing en blanc they won't get it and again the stay will be denied. at that point I quote Justice Story, " where the law is mute, there is no law." Dc will not have any gun laws. they will make an emergency appeal to SCOTUS. They won't get it.
 
It's funny--the reason I became interested in firearms and carrying for protection was because of D.C.'s bad neighborhoods. I used to work in DC and commute back to Maryland everyday. Almost every week, I'd hear another story about how some individual would get mugged at nearby metro stations. In fact, I once rode with a DOJ prosecutor through the metro train's green line, and he was so antsy he insisted on getting off before the train entered a bad section of town.

With high crime rates and a reputedly lax criminal justice system, I wonder if DC's anti-gun stance is really rational...
 
It sounds like this will be a good litmus test for what the word "reasonable" means. The SCOTUS opinions left plenty of room for reasonable restrictions and regulations.

Now there'll be a great deal of discussion about the legality or Constitutionality of banning handguns based on action type and capacity. So DC's law about allowing only revolvers will be challenged. Did I read somewhere that they would allow only 5-shot revolvers? If so that'll be challenged. I'm not even going to touch Full Auto...look at how much work needs to be done just to ensure anyone who can legally buy a gun can get a plain G17.

Not to mention if regulating the condition of a legally owned firearm inside a home is legal. I'd rather not have a gun than to have one I couldn't keep loaded, unlocked (but secured in a safe if not on my person).

My wife, who is usually pretty liberal, was almost mad about this, I was proud of her. She actually asked me if they were making laws for legal gun owners or criminals to follow. Ever since she had a small scare one day she was home during the day she has been warming up to the idea of handling and shooting firearms.

So I think this situation confirms that Heller exactly what most are calling it, a first step. I think it was a large first step in a three story staircase. Getting confirmation that we as individuals have the right to bear arms is huge, now it's time to tackle the details, decide what falls into federal hands and what falls into the state hands.
 
Getting confirmation that we as individuals have the right to bear arms is huge...
Click to expand...

Actually, Heller was a "Keep" case, not a "bear" case. The SCOTUS used language around bearing in addition to their express attention given to keeping arms. Their decision struck down DC's law but more importantly affirmed the lower courts decision, in which was stated "once it is determined that a handgun is an arm, it is not open to [DC] to ban it." Again, a "keep" comment, if you will. But the logic, legally should then extend to bearing arms as well. Once it is determined that a handgun is an arm, it should not be open to DC to bar it being borne. That, of course, would be an infringement. Their new laws restrict bearing arms to the point of virtually effecting a ban, which the SCOTUS also said would not be constitutional.

It's obvious DC officials need to be spanked in a case explicitely for arms borne outside the home. "...shall not be infringed." is language that doesn't lend itself well to restricting possession exclusively to one's home.

Anti-gun folks still have another big case to lose before we've necessarily preserved a free State. My wish is that it wouldn't take 30 years.
 
Did anyone really think that D. C. would just cave and go "Vermont"? I thought it was understood that Heller was only the beginning. A good beginning, but still only a beginning nonetheless.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling that this will lead to another lawsuit. DC is going to be a battle ground for testing just how far a city, county, state, country can go with their "sensible gun laws."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top