Bubbles
Member
From a purely practical point of view, how exactly would one lawfully procure a firearm in DC? Do you have to go to the dealer, pay for it, obtain the make, model, S/N, etc., take that info to some office, fill out your registration paperwork, wait for the registration to be approved, then go pick up your gun?
Supreme Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.
The court's 5-4 ruling strikes down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment.
"Unfortunately and disappointingly, the Supreme Court opted not to uphold the three-decade-old handgun ban in the District of Columbia," D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty said during a news conference following the ruling.
"It is important to both respect the court's authority and then to act quickly," Fenty said.
Fenty said the Metropolitan Police Department has 21 days to develop a system for citizens to register lawful handguns in their homes. Interim Attorney General Peter Nickles said that rules on who can apply for gun licenses will not change. Applicants will be required to be mentally competent adults, and they'll be fingerprinted.
In the meantime, D.C.'s gun ban will remain in effect. Automatic and semi-automatic guns remain illegal, Fenty said. Citizens still can't carry guns outside the home in D.C.
The police department will have an amnesty period in which residents who own handguns that were not previously registered can register without fear of criminal liability.
Police Chief Cathy Lanier stressed that citizens are still encouraged to store firearms safely in their homes, even though the court's ruling struck down D.C.'s requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks. Every person who registers a gun in D.C. is given a trigger lock, she said.
Lanier said citizens with questions can call 202-727-4275. A toll-free hot line will be set up to answer questions.
D.C. Council Judiciary Committee Chairman Phil Mendelson has scheduled a hearing for next Wednesday on a new law that will place restrictions on handguns without banning them outright.
It will take several weeks for the court's opinion to become law, News4's Tom Sherwood reported. D.C.'s gun ban is still on the books today.
Court Strikes Down Prohibition On Guns In Home, Trigger Lock Requirement
The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia. The court's decision goes further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.
Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.
The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.
Scalia noted that the handgun is Americans' preferred weapon of self-defense in part because "it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police."
In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."
He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."
Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.
Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."
In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority "are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and believe the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns."
Guns Rights Supporters, Lawmakers React To Ruling
Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.
The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the court's ruling will help put an end to ideological debates that have hindered city officials working to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
"Today's decision by the Supreme Court upholding those rights will benefit our coalition by finally putting to rest the ideological debates that have for too long obscured an obvious fact: criminals, who have no right to purchase or possess guns, nevertheless have easy access to them," the mayor said in a statement.
"Mayors and police chiefs have a responsibility to crack down on illegal guns and punish gun criminals, and it is encouraging that the Supreme Court recognizes the constitutionality of reasonable regulations that allow for us to carry out those responsibilities," Bloomberg said.
"I think this is a long overdue decision; I don't think the precedent has been seriously reaffirmed in decades," said. Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis.
"The right to bear arms is a fundamental right we enjoy as citizens of the United States," said Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn. "From individuals being able to protect their family and their home to sportsmen venturing into the outdoors, this is an important and historic day for all citizens of this great country."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. "I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it," she said.
"Today, President Bush's radical Supreme Court justices put rigid ideology ahead of the safety of communities in New Jersey and across the country," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. "This decision illustrates why I have strongly opposed extremist judicial nominees and will continue to do so in the future."
The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.
White House reaction was restrained. "We're pleased that the Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of Americans to keep and bear arms," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.
Armed Security Guard's Suit Overturns One Of Nation's Strictest Gun Laws
The capital's gun law was among the nation's strictest.
Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller's favor and struck down Washington's handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.
Heller's attorneys released a statement after the Supreme Court's decision was issued Thursday.
"Besides being blatantly unconstitutional, the District's gun ban has been totally ineffective," co-counsel Robert Levy said in a statement. "Today's ruling sends a clear message that the District may not attempt to solve its crime problems by violating the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep functional firearms, including handguns, in their homes for lawful self defense."
"The Second Amendment says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. After thirty years of ignoring that right, the District will finally have to respect it," Heller said.
The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.
Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.
The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.
Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the court's consideration of Washington's restrictions.
The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.
Supreme Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.
The court's 5-4 ruling strikes down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment.
"Unfortunately and disappointingly, the Supreme Court opted not to uphold the three-decade-old handgun ban in the District of Columbia," D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty said during a news conference following the ruling.
"It is important to both respect the court's authority and then to act quickly," Fenty said.
Fenty said the Metropolitan Police Department has 21 days to develop a system for citizens to register lawful handguns in their homes. Interim Attorney General Peter Nickles said that rules on who can apply for gun licenses will not change. Applicants will be required to be mentally competent adults, and they'll be fingerprinted.
In the meantime, D.C.'s gun ban will remain in effect. Automatic and semi-automatic guns remain illegal, Fenty said. Citizens still can't carry guns outside the home in D.C.
The police department will have an amnesty period in which residents who own handguns that were not previously registered can register without fear of criminal liability.
Police Chief Cathy Lanier stressed that citizens are still encouraged to store firearms safely in their homes, even though the court's ruling struck down D.C.'s requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks. Every person who registers a gun in D.C. is given a trigger lock, she said.
Lanier said citizens with questions can call 202-727-4275. A toll-free hot line will be set up to answer questions.
D.C. Council Judiciary Committee Chairman Phil Mendelson has scheduled a hearing for next Wednesday on a new law that will place restrictions on handguns without banning them outright.
It will take several weeks for the court's opinion to become law, News4's Tom Sherwood reported. D.C.'s gun ban is still on the books today.
Court Strikes Down Prohibition On Guns In Home, Trigger Lock Requirement
The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia. The court's decision goes further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.
Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.
The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.
Scalia noted that the handgun is Americans' preferred weapon of self-defense in part because "it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police."
In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."
He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."
Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.
Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."
In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority "are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and believe the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns."
Guns Rights Supporters, Lawmakers React To Ruling
Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.
The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the court's ruling will help put an end to ideological debates that have hindered city officials working to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
"Today's decision by the Supreme Court upholding those rights will benefit our coalition by finally putting to rest the ideological debates that have for too long obscured an obvious fact: criminals, who have no right to purchase or possess guns, nevertheless have easy access to them," the mayor said in a statement.
"Mayors and police chiefs have a responsibility to crack down on illegal guns and punish gun criminals, and it is encouraging that the Supreme Court recognizes the constitutionality of reasonable regulations that allow for us to carry out those responsibilities," Bloomberg said.
"I think this is a long overdue decision; I don't think the precedent has been seriously reaffirmed in decades," said. Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis.
"The right to bear arms is a fundamental right we enjoy as citizens of the United States," said Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn. "From individuals being able to protect their family and their home to sportsmen venturing into the outdoors, this is an important and historic day for all citizens of this great country."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. "I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it," she said.
"Today, President Bush's radical Supreme Court justices put rigid ideology ahead of the safety of communities in New Jersey and across the country," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. "This decision illustrates why I have strongly opposed extremist judicial nominees and will continue to do so in the future."
The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.
White House reaction was restrained. "We're pleased that the Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of Americans to keep and bear arms," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.
Armed Security Guard's Suit Overturns One Of Nation's Strictest Gun Laws
The capital's gun law was among the nation's strictest.
Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller's favor and struck down Washington's handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.
Heller's attorneys released a statement after the Supreme Court's decision was issued Thursday.
"Besides being blatantly unconstitutional, the District's gun ban has been totally ineffective," co-counsel Robert Levy said in a statement. "Today's ruling sends a clear message that the District may not attempt to solve its crime problems by violating the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep functional firearms, including handguns, in their homes for lawful self defense."
"The Second Amendment says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. After thirty years of ignoring that right, the District will finally have to respect it," Heller said.
The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.
Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.
The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.
Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the court's consideration of Washington's restrictions.
The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.
