1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DC Carry ruling... finally

Discussion in 'Legal' started by AFRetired, Jul 26, 2014.

  1. AFRetired

    AFRetired Active Member

    Finally, a ruling on the DC carry issue. I'm sure it will be appealed to SCOUS.

    "A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Saturday overturned the city’s total ban on residents being allowing to carry firearms outside their home, declaring the law “unconstitutional” in a landmark decision for gun-rights activists"

  2. Midwest

    Midwest Well-Known Member

    BREAKING: DC’s Ban on Right To Carry Overturned

    BREAKING: DC’s Ban on Right To Carry Overturned

    This is not speculation, this isn't someone's opinion, this is the real deal.


    "Gun rights advocate extraordinaire Alan Gura reports that the DC District Court just overturned the District of Columbia’s ban on the right to carry firearms."

    Here is the ruling


    Also read here


  3. aarondhgraham

    aarondhgraham Well-Known Member

    This is great news,,,

    This is great news,,,
    But the cynic in me says,,,
    DC will drag this out for many years

    I'm impatient is all.


  4. splithoof

    splithoof Well-Known Member

    Thank you for posting that link…..
    While the appeals will be certain, and the process very long, it is still good news. Perhaps in my lifetime this will eventually bleed down to Californiastan, and effect meaningful, practical change. The politicians and their minions will continue to drag their diamond coated titanium heels all the way to the end, but in the end I think liberty will prevail. Another glimmer of hope in a statist dust storm.
  5. Twiki357

    Twiki357 Well-Known Member

    Emily Miller (Fox5 DC): “The court ordered the city to now allow residents from the District and other states to carry weapon within its boundaries.” I sure like that other states part. If it stands as implied, it could also open the door for national reciprocity.
  6. Yo Mama

    Yo Mama Well-Known Member

    Someone buy Gura a beer!

    You the man!!!
  7. splithoof

    splithoof Well-Known Member

    Not only beer for Gura, but DIAPERS for the politicians. The politicians of Leftist Los Angeles may in the future really need them, especially the chief of police.
  8. Willie Sutton

    Willie Sutton Well-Known Member

    Just logged on to share the news, and see it's already been posted.

    Nice news for a Saturday!


  9. pendennis

    pendennis Well-Known Member

    While I'm very glad for the citizens of D.C., and those who would enter the District, I would like to know why McDonald isn't applicable, and eliminating all these separate actions.

    McDonald recognized that the 14th Amendment applied to the several states, ergo protecting 2nd Amendment rights.
  10. Field Tester

    Field Tester Well-Known Member

    Wow, wow, wow!
    This ruling is going to be felt in a lot more places than just DC
    First the 9th Circuit and now this. Hopefully we can keep this momentum.
  11. mgkdrgn

    mgkdrgn Well-Known Member

    So, they switch from "no permits" to "may issue" ... and issue none.

    Big whoop.
  12. bushmaster1313

    bushmaster1313 Well-Known Member


    it don't mean squat until the Supreme Court says that may issue is unconstitutional.
  13. ClickClickD'oh

    ClickClickD'oh Well-Known Member

    "May Issue" hasn't been doing so well in the courts either these days.
  14. Midwest

    Midwest Well-Known Member

    Now we have to work on getting that "may issue" changed in New Jersey, Maryland, Hawaii, New York City and the other counties in NY and California that are "may issue" as well as Rhode Island which 1/2 the state is "may issue".
  15. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Make sure you've read the whole ruling before you decide it ISN'T AWESOME.

    It would seem that's the exact problem the plaintiffs filed for relief from (one of them).

    In its decision, the court specifically ORDERS that DC is enjoined from enforcing it's law D.C. Code § 22-4504(a).

    So they can't enforce their no-carry law, and in fact it seems they can't even require a license to carry at all!
  16. GlowinPontiac

    GlowinPontiac Well-Known Member

    I have a feeling the first person to test this out by carrying in DC with no permit is going to be in for a world of hurt. The police and politicians are going to be very angry and looking for someone to make pay for this.
  17. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    So are you saying you expect them to ignore the court's order? Or just that they'll harass with other charges?
  18. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    My simplified summation of the decision is this:

    1) DC can still require a permit to possess a handgun.
    2) DC HAS to issue that permit, if no legitimate reason is found not to.
    3) DC HAS to issue that permit to folks who reside in DC and outside of DC too.
    4) IF a person has been issued a permit to possess, they are legal to carry it.
    5) When applying for a permit to possess, "Carry for defense outside the home" will be an acceptable reason.

    Did I miss anything?
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2014
  19. Willie Sutton

    Willie Sutton Well-Known Member

    In their complaint, Plaintiffs assert two claims for relief. In their first claim, Plaintiffs allege that, "y requiring a permit to carry a handgun in public, yet refusing to issue such permits and refusing to allow the possession of any handgun that would be carried in public, Defendants maintain a complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public by almost all individuals."

    Seems like a springboard to revisit the NJ "May Issue" situation.

    Good news in any event.


  20. splithoof

    splithoof Well-Known Member

    If, after all the appeals have been exhausted and the courts rule in our favor, I can see places like DC and Los Angeles City & County simply refusing to comply, either through endless delay tactics, or an outright "no, we won't, because we feel the ruling is wrong" attitude. In that event, would there be any practical recourse? Who would/could actually MAKE them physically issue any permits? I see outright refusal on some parts.

Share This Page