DC Carry ruling... finally

F-111, I don't think you are mistaken. There will probably be another go-around on this - even separate of an appeal by DC authorities - due the messiness of DC firearms regs. § 7-2506.01 could make it difficult for non-DC residents to carry in DC (at a minimum, they'd need to watch out whether their normal capacity magazines meet DC restrictions (10 rounds or less).

Great ruling, but I don't think this is done yet.

Am I mistaken?

Click to expand...

I think that by "restricted pistol bullets" they mean so-called "cop killer bullets," which are a specifically defined category. Not the run-of-the-mill pistol rounds.

In Heller, I seem to remember a sentence that used the words "at the ready" or "in case of confrontation" or something like that, so that implies a loaded gun, not an unloaded gun. So that would be an absurd outcome to be able to continue a ammo ban.
It will be interesting if they appeal, that can mean they end up writing another check to the plaintiffs, like Chicago has had to do more than once.

Awesome news!!!

It will be interesting if they appeal, that can mean they end up writing another check to the plaintiffs, like Chicago has had to do more than once.

Click to expand...

It's not like it's real money, after all. It's only the taxpayers' money. :banghead::banghead::banghead:

AlexanderA said:

In the meantime, the District government will enact a stringent licensing scheme that is, in effect, "may issue" verging on "no issue." And Congress will go along with this (regardless of its political makeup), because the Congresspeople value their personal security more than they do the pro-gun rhetoric that they spout for the benefit of their constituents back home.

Click to expand...

Don't be to sure about that. The House recently passed Thomas Massie's Amendment to restore DC residents gun rights.

The House of Representatives passed an amendment Wednesday that would prevent the District of Columbia from spending funds to enforce local gun laws — including registration and fingerprint requirements for gun owners.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/17/house-passes-amendment-to-restore-gun-rights-in-d-c/

The real answer to this dilemma is for Congress to take back the power (Article I, Section 8, Clause 17) it unconstitutionally delegated to the DC City Council, then abide the Second Amendment.

Woody

The real answer to this dilemma is for Congress to take back the power (Article I, Section 8, Clause 17) it unconstitutionally delegated to the DC City Council, then abide the Second Amendment.

Click to expand...

Won't happen, except in a fantasy world so long as the Democrats control the Senate and Obama is in the White House with his veto pen ready. :banghead:

What's this? Washington D.C. gun carry?

Am I seeing things, or did I just read that a judge overturned Washington, D.C.'s ban on gun carry?


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/us/judge-overturns-dc-ban-on-guns-in-public.html

steve4102 said:

Don't be to sure about that. The House recently passed Thomas Massie's Amendment to restore DC residents gun rights.

The House of Representatives passed an amendment Wednesday that would prevent the District of Columbia from spending funds to enforce local gun laws — including registration and fingerprint requirements for gun owners.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/17/house-passes-amendment-to-restore-gun-rights-in-d-c/

Click to expand...

Yep I reported that here and the thread got locked.

" DC: Gun Law Nullified and Rights Restored?"


http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=757080

.

I think that by "restricted pistol bullets" they mean so-called "cop killer bullets," which are a specifically defined category. Not the run-of-the-mill pistol rounds.

Click to expand...

Good call.

§ 7-2501.01. Definitions

(13A) (A) "Restricted pistol bullet" means:

(i) A projectile or projectile core which may be used in a pistol and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium;

(ii) A full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a pistol and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25% of the total weight of the projectile; or

(iii) Ammunition for a .50 BMG rifle.​

(B) The term "restricted pistol bullet" does not include:

(i) Shotgun shot required by federal or state environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes;

(ii) A frangible projectile designed for target shooting;

(iii) A projectile which the Attorney General of the United States finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes; or

(iv) Any other projectile or projectile core which the Attorney General of the United States finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil and gas well perforating device.​

Click to expand...

It seems today is the only day that Constitutional Carry is law in DC before the city council files for an injunction when they meet up tomorrow.

Quick, everyone carry in DC!

Nobody should fear there being any concealed pistol permits being issued in DC. The permitting process requires a background check with a simple disqualification for crooks (politicians) and criminals (the rest): This simple provision will prevent any permits being issued in the district.

The real answer to this dilemma is for Congress to take back the power (Article I, Section 8, Clause 17) it unconstitutionally delegated to the DC City Council, then abide the Second Amendment.

Click to expand...

You have to realize that for years, the push by D.C. residents has been for full statehood for the District, which would give them two U.S. Senators and a voting Representative. (Even the license plates have the slogan "Taxation without representation.") Obama recently said that he's on board with this idea.

Home rule was seen as a harmless sop to the locals, that would not upset the applecart nationally. And except for gun control, generally it is. Remember that Congress can step in and legislate for the District whenever it wants to.

The other alternative would be for the federal government to retrocede most of the District to Maryland, just as it did with the Virginia part in the 1840's. All it needs to do is keep the "federal core" (the White House, the Capitol, and the area between them) as the national capital. Of course Maryland doesn't want this, nor do the local residents.

"Even the license plates have the slogan "Taxation without representation.""

Yep.
And despite their repeated call for a 'commuter tax' on anyone that works in the city but lives outside the city.

All for me, none for thee.

tyeo098 said:

Quick, everyone carry in DC!

Click to expand...

I know you're kidding (maybe), but until all LE agencies have formally "gotten the memo", I'd have serious pause. And considering the number of LE entities in the DC to have duly notified, someone is likely to be left out of the loop. Gura says his feeling is that the order is in effect immediately, but due notice is required in the court order.

The AG's office was notified, but as of Sunday morning, MPD is still claiming not to have received formal notice (they weren't even aware of it last night). The FOP DC police union hasn't received any "official" guidance at all. (Which means both MPD and the police union are quite aware, but playing the "due notice" game).

I'm not overly optimistic. The court found that a "complete ban" was unconstitutional. That still leaves a lot of wiggle room for the city to eventually come back with highly restrictive carry regulations.

I'd hate to carry in DC because it's such a hodgepodge of city and federal jurisdictions. One area might be U.S. Capitol Police, next one is DC Metropolitan Police, and another is U.S Park Police.

Pretty sure a CCW issued from the city will not trump any federal restrictions (i.e. taking a tour of the White House or Capitol.)

DC won't be issuing carry permits, as the court's order forbids them to enforce the law requiring one.

However, this ruling does not seem to directly contravene the federal law prohibiting carry in a federal building (where federal employees work). BUT, since the rule change a few years ago, carry in federal park land is governed by the law in whatever state the park is located in. So, with no anti-carry law in place in DC, you'd be fine to carry on the grounds of the Capitol, the Mall, around the memorials, etc.

We probably can't get them to pass a shall issue law. We can probably gridlock it and force permit less carry.

We probably can't get them to pass a shall issue law. We can probably gridlock it and force permit less carry.

Click to expand...

Looks like the court cut right to the chase, there...

DC won't be issuing carry permits, as the court's order forbids them to enforce the law requiring one.

Click to expand...

The question on issuing permits and who can carry is twofold.

Is that injunction solely because they were not issuing any permits? Should DC come back with an acceptable (to the court) permit process would that be lifted?

Does the DC possession permit become a carry permit, if not by name.

I don't know for sure, but I don't think the premise of requiring a permit to carry has been challenged. If DC comes out with some sort of carry permit and it is onerous, that may be next up on the docket. (I can only hope!)

Woody

I hope I'm not wrong, BUT it seems the tide is turning, slowly but forcefully.

With the 2nd amendment foundation in the news, and commercials about the inability for citizens in Chicago and D.C. not being allowed to protect their families, and sadly a very poor performance over the past many years of the President on down thru a majority of his Democratic and a smattering of some Republicans, THERE WILL BE SOME CHANGES MADE.

Sadly we have to fight/legislate to get back our God given rights, but we will. The ebb and flow of things is gonna sweep back these restrictions on our rights and all will be better.

be safe

This demonstrates the trend of our gov't and elected/appointed "officials" who do what they want w/o regard for law because they know it will be a long time if ever that their law get's overturned and they risk nothing for doing so. Try doing that in the private sector and see how quick you're fired and on the street.

DC will undoubtedly appeal the ruling but at least the five year hostage hold has been broken.

AlexanderA said:

If this stands on appeal (which I doubt will happen), it's going to cause a security headache for the folks trying to guard the federal government activities and installations within the District. They're probably going to respond by declaring the "federal enclave" (the core area including the White House, the Capitol, the Mall, and all the surrounding government buildings and connecting streets) a gun-free zone, the same as a military base. In the meantime, the District government will enact a stringent licensing scheme that is, in effect, "may issue" verging on "no issue." And Congress will go along with this (regardless of its political makeup), because the Congresspeople value their personal security more than they do the pro-gun rhetoric that they spout for the benefit of their constituents back home. Call me cynical.

Click to expand...

Interesting take and quite probable.