Washington, D.C. 'contorts' around 2nd Amendment ruling

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by alvagoldbook, Aug 5, 2008.

  1. alvagoldbook

    alvagoldbook Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    DC 'contorts' around 2nd Amendment ruling
    Jeff Johnson - OneNewsNow - 7/30/2008 7:35:00 AM
    http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=196886

    The District of Columbia is being sued again over its gun control laws, after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the city must allow its citizens to arm themselves for self-defense.

    The Supreme Court ruled late last month that Washington, DC's, handgun ban and its trigger lock requirement were unconstitutional violations of the Second Amendment. Stephen Halbrook is the attorney for Security Officer Dick Heller, who first sued DC over its gun control laws. Halbrook says Heller -- who works as a private security guard in a federal courts building -- is taking the District to court again.

    "They're trying to make it as difficult and be as obstructionist as possible so that people are discouraged from getting guns," Halbrook argues. "In fact, there's no firearms dealers [sic] in DC because of the previous ban."

    Halbrook believes the District will try to block dealers from locating in the city through the use of zoning laws. "It's like the Supreme Court ruling that there's a constitutional right to possess books, but the [local] governmental body says, 'Okay, but you can't sell any,'" he adds.

    The District continues to ban all semi-automatic handguns. And while the Supreme Court ordered DC to allow guns to be kept unlocked for self-defense, city officials amended their ordinance to say that residents may have their guns unlocked only while being used in self-defense.

    "Notice the difference between what the Supreme Court said -- that you can keep a gun for immediate use for self-defense -- versus DC saying that you can only have it unlocked while actually being used," Halbrook scrutinizes. "And so, it's like the robber's got to make an appointment before they come to your house so you can get your gun ready."

    Dick Heller successfully registered a revolver, but the District refused to register his semi-automatic handgun, which led to the latest lawsuit. The attorney predicts more suits against the city as anti-gun officials, he says, try every legal contortion imaginable to keep law-abiding citizens from being armed for self-defense.
  2. alvagoldbook

    alvagoldbook Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    ...this wouldn't be the first time that D.C. wasn't business friendly. but it wouldn't be too hard to drive over to maryland or virginia to buy your self-defense needs.
  3. user

    user Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,016
    Location:
    Northern piedmont of Va. and Middle of Nowhere, We
    I don't know about that. Maryland is decidedly pro-crime, and most of Northern Virginia's become that way. A person would have to drive to Leesburg, Woodbridge, or Manassas to find a decent gun shop, all of which are like twenty-five miles outside the beltway.
  4. armedandsafe

    armedandsafe Guest

    The only problem with going into a State to buy is that it is illegal by federal law, unless you have a local FFL to do the transfer. There are no FFLs in DC willing to make transfers, so.... Violence Policy Center has an FFL, but doesn't use it and hasn't a store front. There are a couple of others, but they are corporate, dealing only with the govenment on contract.

    Catch 22...squared.

    Pops
  5. Yup, Catch 22 indeed, Pops. Joseph Heller wrote quite a novel when he published that one in 1961. I read it many years ago, but I looked up the passage that "explains" Catch 22 for those who many not have read it:

    "There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.
    "That's some catch, that Catch-22," Yossarian observed.
    "It's the best there is," Doc Daneeka agreed."
  6. alvagoldbook

    alvagoldbook Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    really? You can't buy a firearm in Virginia and then move to DC with it or any other state? I don't know how the law applies on this, so I find all of it kinda confusing.
  7. ponycar17

    ponycar17 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    5,053
    Location:
    South Carolina
    I'm guessing the rule defining semi-automatics as 'machine guns' has to do with the court's implication that the machine gun ban of 1934 is an acceptable regulation. Given that, how the heck do semi-automatics fit into the definition of 'machine guns'? Even Webster doesn't understand that one... :confused:
  8. ckill1

    ckill1 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    Messages:
    299
    Location:
    SW Iowa
    Alva-
    Its no problem at all to purchase a handgun in one state and move to another satate, but while living in one state, purchasing a handgun in another then driving home is illegal everywhere. I live in SW Iowa, and according to federal law, cannot purchase a handgun in Omaha, NE. without first having it transferred to an FFL holder in Iowa to finish the paperwork. Long guns are OK, tho.
    Chris
  9. RDak

    RDak New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Messages:
    25
    Location:
    Michigan
    No Alva, you can't buy a firearm from another State and bring it into your State as an individual. It's been that way since 1968.

    DC knows that. They also know that requiring the gun to be locked up keeps DC residents from using them effectively. They are simply continuing their ban on private firearms ownership in direct violation of the holding in Heller, supra.
  10. Marlin T

    Marlin T Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,888
    Location:
    New Mexico
    Ponycar, its all in the footnotes and definitions.

    It doesn’t matter what you think the word “UP” means, if it has a footnote next to it. One might be wise to actually find out what the footnote means. It might mean, what you and I know as, down.

    Another example, what is an “assault rifle”? A Marlin lever action 30/30? Yep, if those like Alva have their way it will be.

    Speaking of Alva, the next time you’re out of your home state, try and buy a firearm. It’s not going to happen you commie.
  11. ponycar17

    ponycar17 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    5,053
    Location:
    South Carolina
    I agree on that... Already 'assault rifle' has been twisted to mean semi-auto versus the original fully-automatic rifles. People don't seem to understand when I tell them how slippery the slope is with loosely defining guns as bad based on cosmetic features. How long before a Remington 700 deer rifle becomes known as a 'sniper rifle' and is stigmatized in the media so that every soccer mom and dad wants to ban those as well? :eek:

    Slippery slopes are just that... If you lead the Lemmings to them, they'll go over the edge. ;)
  12. SolidVFR

    SolidVFR New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2008
    Messages:
    346
    Yup yup yup...a sure sign that an argument has no validity is when name calling starts. They're not willing to discuss why guns should be banned(I say discuss, which means that there are two views, each contributing), rather they just convey guns and gun owners as scary and dangerous. Hence, John Q. Public goes and votes for "X" candidate because they will eliminate those awful people who own guns.

    The lefties are have betrayed every single principle valued by our founding fathers. Hence, they are not American, so I say let them go find they're own damn country. Let the people who love this country and freedom, and who will die for it live freely as they deserve.

    (end of rant.)
  13. alvagoldbook

    alvagoldbook Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    excuse me, but I have already stated in previous posts that I am OPPOSED to all forms of "gun control" no matter what the weapon. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing that should be regulated are things classified as WMDs.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Washington DC's gun carry ban Jul 26, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Washington Initiatives 591 and 594 Jul 24, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Washington State anti-gun legislation Feb 18, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Add Washington State to the Ban List Feb 14, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum **ALERT**Washington's copy of Constitution auction! Jun 13, 2012

Share This Page