Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 7/18/2008 2:18:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/18/2008 2:19:12 PM EDT by raysheen]
(saw this on GT) District of Comlumbia says you can't use your gun for self defense until your gun application is approved. Also, they will confiscate your gun and possibly file charges if you try to register a semi-auto handgun.

Story Link


The only application received yesterday was from a woman who brought a revolver to the registration office under the amnesty program, officials said.

After the gun was test-fired and the woman completed registration paperwork and a written test, she went home with the gun to await a decision on her application.

By law, she must keep the gun in her home, unloaded and either disassembled or fitted with a trigger lock, and she is not allowed to use it, even for self-defense, unless her application is approved.

Assistant Police Chief Peter J. Newsham said if anyone shows up to register a semiautomatic pistol that fits the city's definition of a machine gun(which is ANY semiauto pistols), police will confiscate the gun but will not immediately arrest the owner. But he said police reserve the right to investigate and eventually file charges.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:21:20 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:23:53 PM EDT
This is getting to the point of being comical. It's like a fucking circus up there. I can't wait to see what the court has to say.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:25:10 PM EDT
I feel a much broader ruling coming on.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:25:27 PM EDT
Can we canonize Fenty for all he's done for us?

Saint Fenty: Patron Saint of Elected Idiots and Gun Rights Advocates.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:25:52 PM EDT
Heller made the right choice to leave his 1911 in MD when he tried to register it.

Interesting "right of self-defense" if it is utterly contingent upon government approval.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:28:15 PM EDT
Thought the SC said you had a right to defend yourself in your home...

Not that you had to seek approval to defend yourself first. Is LAPD running DC now?
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:28:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CK1:

Interesting "right of self-defense" if it is utterly contingent upon government approval.


Laughable.

Those bastards just do not understand.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:31:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Burley:

Originally Posted By CK1:

Interesting "right of self-defense" if it is utterly contingent upon government approval.


Laughable.

Those bastards just do not understand.


Sounds like England
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:32:40 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:46:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CK1:
Interesting "right of self-defense" if it is utterly contingent upon government approval.
My thoughts exactly
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:49:32 PM EDT
They are morons. THANK GOD FOR MORONS!
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:50:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/18/2008 2:51:03 PM EDT by Hawken50]
didn't somebody smart once say "never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake" ???
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:51:09 PM EDT
The biggest problem is going to be when/if some of their restrictions are ruled constitutional.

If that happens there could be major issues.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:52:12 PM EDT
This message is for Washington D.C.:
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:52:48 PM EDT
Man, those #$&* suckers really think they're above the law don't they?

Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:55:12 PM EDT
Why the hell would anyone register thier gun in D.C.? What is the punishment for having an unregistered pistol?
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:55:13 PM EDT
I'll say to DC what an old girlfriend of mine use to say to me. "Don't! Stop! Don't! Stop! Don't stop, don't stop, don't stop, don't stop!". And the always popular "Stop it, I love it!".
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:55:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SilentType:
....those #$&* suckers really think they're above the law don't they?


YES THEY DO!!!!!!!! ...........They REALLY DO!!!
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 2:56:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/18/2008 2:56:43 PM EDT by SilentType]

Originally Posted By NewFloridaEnthusiast:
The biggest problem is going to be when/if some of their restrictions are ruled constitutional.

If that happens there could be major issues.


Ummm, no way. Heller spelled out pretty clearly that firearms in common useage are allowed and semi-automatic pistols are probably more common today than revolvers and certainly outsell them year after year. I don't have a clue how D.C. could get around that.

Heller also said that we have a long standing and protected right to self-defense.

The Supreme Court couldn't have been any more clear short of drawing their opinion into a Cartoon format for the retards who run D.C. or I should say have run it into the ground.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 3:00:15 PM EDT
D.C. Tries to Finesse Gun Ruling

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/16/AR2008071602491.html

So the mayor and the D.C. Council enacted an emergency law setting up a cumbersome mechanism by which residents who want to own a gun legally may register a weapon if they clear a background check, pass a vision test and a written test on gun safety, pay a fee and wait for the bureaucracy to complete all these steps. "There are circumstances where it could take months," Police Chief Cathy Lanier conceded, and you could almost hear the elected officials around her emitting "heh-hehs" of mischievous delight.

Even then, D.C. gun owners would be prohibited from keeping their gun loaded unless they could demonstrate that, as the city's new gun law says, the firearm is "being used against a reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm."
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 3:03:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TUMOR:

Originally Posted By SilentType:
....those #$&* suckers really think they're above the law don't they?


YES THEY DO!!!!!!!! ...........They REALLY DO!!!


No- they think they are the law. Don't want to relinquish any political power to the individual. The State is beginning and the end of all things wonderful and marvelous.

Sounds like they want another court battle. Maybe there is a method to their madness.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 3:03:13 PM EDT

must keep the gun in her home, unloaded and either disassembled or fitted with a trigger lock


I'm no legal scholar, but didn't the decision specifically say this was a NO-GO?
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 3:04:14 PM EDT
It's very sipmle really, DC will not do anything unless prompted by very specific direction of the courts.... As a municipality, they hare the luxury of doing what they wnat untill challenged in court..... We did win, however, for DC to comply, there will have to be many more court decisions to completely clear any loopholes they deem as law.......... Let h=the qames begin!
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 3:07:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/18/2008 3:08:14 PM EDT by DragoMuseveni]

Originally Posted By Hawken50:
didn't somebody smart once say "never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake" ???


Napoleon said that.

Someone else said "Arms are permissible when there is no hope except in arms."
I hope the DC tyrrants get a personal lesson on what that means.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 3:10:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By timr:
D.C. Tries to Finesse Gun Ruling

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/16/AR2008071602491.html

So the mayor and the D.C. Council enacted an emergency law setting up a cumbersome mechanism by which residents who want to own a gun legally may register a weapon if they clear a background check, pass a vision test and a written test on gun safety, pay a fee and wait for the bureaucracy to complete all these steps. "There are circumstances where it could take months," Police Chief Cathy Lanier conceded, and you could almost hear the elected officials around her emitting "heh-hehs" of mischievous delight.

Even then, D.C. gun owners would be prohibited from keeping their gun loaded unless they could demonstrate that, as the city's new gun law says, the firearm is "being used against a reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm."


That's absurd.

For starters, the Supreme Court recognized self-defense as a right and for them to put the burden of proof on the Defendant to show they had reason to perceive a threat flys in the face of what is now Case Law.

Link Posted: 7/18/2008 4:02:01 PM EDT
Can't wait until this goes back to court!
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 5:01:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 87GN:
Thought the SC said you had a right to defend yourself in your home...

Not that you had to seek approval to defend yourself first. Is LAPD running DC now?


LAPD is more than happy to have you shoot bad guys in your house. It's the non-bad guys shot that has their knickers in a wad right now.

Didn't they say in the SCOTUS verbal arguments that they wouldn't prosecute someone using a gun for self-defense even if it wasn't registered and it was illegally possessed?
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 5:20:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/18/2008 5:21:17 PM EDT by BatcaveSouth]

Originally Posted By 41Fan:
I feel a much broader ruling coming on.


Just what I was thinking. The Supremes are going to have to spell it out in one syllable words for these morons.

eta: probably a lower court.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 5:55:24 PM EDT
Never interrupt an enemy when he is making a mistake... N. Bonaparte

Thumbing your nose at the USSC will eventually bring on their wrath.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 6:16:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PaDanby:

Originally Posted By 87GN:
Thought the SC said you had a right to defend yourself in your home...

Not that you had to seek approval to defend yourself first. Is LAPD running DC now?


LAPD is more than happy to have you shoot bad guys in your house. It's the non-bad guys shot that has their knickers in a wad right now.

Didn't they say in the SCOTUS verbal arguments that they wouldn't prosecute someone using a gun for self-defense even if it wasn't registered and it was illegally possessed?


A verbal promise that they won't prosecute means they will determine at the time whether they want to fuck you or not. Same thing with this new "immediate need" provision. If they decide they don't like what you did with your gun, they will declare you had it loaded and functional without an immediate need.
Link Posted: 7/18/2008 6:19:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RichinCM:
Never interrupt an enemy when he is making a mistake... N. Bonaparte

Thumbing your nose at the USSC will eventually bring on their wrath.


The sooner the better
Link Posted: 7/20/2008 3:41:52 AM EDT
Wouldn't it be great if someone was denied a permit for failing the vision test. Wouldn't that be a great grounds for suit regarding the American's with Disabilities Act let alone civil rights violations.
Link Posted: 7/20/2008 3:59:33 AM EDT
It still takes a couple of months to complete a background check and get a CCW in most states.

We dont have to take a written safety test here in GA but it still took me about 2-3 months to complete the process I believe
Top Top