Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by steelerdude99, Oct 23, 2013.
"Mr. Gregory, here is your AR-15 clip".
Elitist Fascism at the least..........
This is pretty sick. Law suit for personal grievance and emotional damage? I'd call being dragged out of your shower naked, cold and afraid pretty traumatic.
What part of Heller does a requirement to have a registration card to buy and possess ammo violate?
Up until I read the part about what happened to his family, I thought this was someone trying g to be a test case. Generally, you "stage" those things better where the family isn't involved. I still hope he has a great lawyer.
Honestly, this doesn't surprise me from DC. I wouldn't have been surprised if they had skipped the warrant entirely.
And Puerto Rico is strongly pushed as a state as well.
Both are highly anti-gun and if given statehood would add senators and votes in favor of anti-gun policies nationwide.
The warrant is a joke. Adding legal items that might be related to a hobby which is perfectly legal to take part in all over the region.
What judge signed that?
I don't know what motivated them to go extreme and raid him in such a fashion, but after doing an estimated $10,000 in damage to his home they probably are going to pursue these petty charges of unfireable ammunition to justify thier actions.
Otherwise they may be on the hook for the cost of damages.
He would be the joke of prison, in for having an unfireable round.
Of course they wouldn't actually send him to prison, which just goes to show how stupid the law is. Making things a felony you don't even feel justify sending someone to jail over. A felon and probably several years of probation with a government representative telling him what he can and cannot do.
Although DC has a form of home rule they still can't pass any laws unless Congress approves of them. The DC City Council has the ability to pass local laws and ordinances. However, pursuant to the District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973 all legislation passed by the D.C. government, including the city's local budget, remains subject to the approval of Congress.
In the case of DC, Congress simply allows the laws to take effect without opposition.
So it ultimately is our illustrious Congress who has actually allowed DC to get away with these onerous gun laws.
My personal take on this matter is that Congress uses DC to do their dirty work for them....... at least as it pertains to the gun laws.
Yes, that is so. Have you called your congressman about this? I wonder how interested he/she will be in "meddling" in DC local council laws.
Yes, I have complained to both current Senators and my House Rep about it and didn't get a response from their offices. Not much different than when the original DC gun ban was enacted way back in 1976......... or since then when many different members of Congress were in office.
I understand your point Sam but I have difficulty believing that Congress could do absolutely nothing about DC gun laws. I think they just didn't want to.
Well, I agree with that. They don't want to. Forcing a change in DC politics (that the citizens will OVERWHELMINGLY despise, remember) is rough going for any congresscritters. Perhaps a real gung-ho "conservative" might get a bit of traction with his base by grandstanding for it, but the majority of politicians aren't going to see getting tangled up with fighting the DC citizens and council and mayor and DC's non-voting representatives, etc., etc, as something that's going to make them look good.
It should be done, but it will almost certainly have to come through the courts.
An update on Mark Witaschek's case
Some of it is repeated info and some new. All of it appalling.
Because it was so pro freedom? I take it you are for slavery.
Read a real history book, Nico. Slavery was on it's way out anyway in the south. The civil war had nothing to do with slavery, other than it was the spark, so to speak. The real issue was, and is, state's rights. The right of the states to make their own laws, to not have the federal government interfere. And yes, they were freedom loving people.
Huh? You gotta be kidding me. Way to back a loser...
[Let us not get off topic re-fighting the Civil War, guys.]
I agree Sam. They're (Congress) probably less likely to do anything counter to DC leadership than to overturn an executive order.
Yeah. There's no profit in it for them. It's very similar to the US sending in the Marines into some 3rd world country to clean up corruption or protect a religious minority or something. It's a worthy cause, but the benefits to the US are few and there will be howls from all sides about us outsiders meddling in someone else's local affairs and forcing our views and beliefs on people who don't want them.
Every time something like this is discussed, DC runs to the microphones and starts shouting about being oppressed by the "conservatives" in congress, not having representation, and not being allowed to conduct their own affairs. It's a bit like the old Uncle Remus story about the tar baby -- no politician comes out of that scuffle looking good.
Now there are a few who would be able to do it deliberately and welcome the notoriety that would come from it, but most wouldn't. They kind of have to be willing to say, "I love freedom SO MUCH that I won't let them make their own choices..."
That's not politically appealing, even when the goal is laudable. When it goes through the court, however, and they're told that they have to bring their laws in conformance with the Constitution, they have much less room to squawk and cry "victim."
I don't care what the DC law is. This is TYRANNY. The guy and his family were treated like common criminals.... disgusting.
Electing Democrats has consequences.
Yet the bogyman is the Republican who may invade your bedroom. Somebody has been duped and it's not me.
This is the sort of thing that gives ALL law enforcement a bad reputation. It's also another reason I'm glad I am no longer a police officer. There was a time this would have been outrageously out-of-the-ordinary; but (sadly) this is becoming more and more commonplace. I'm glad I live in a "back-woods, hillbilly, southern state." It may happen here, but it'll be one of the last places to surrender.
Cases like this are why I never complain about getting called up for jury duty.
Hopefully it get overturned. DC will never see a tourist or business dollar from me and I will NEVER go there.
Same goes for NJ, Chicago, California and any other communist states of America.
In 69, I got a job with the DC police (MPDC). It was a miserable job walking beats in ghetto neighborhoods in Feb where the wind tunnel effect made for 40 MPH winds in 20 degree temps. About 71, I saw home rule coming and racial grievances being the order of the day. I moved to Virginia and started college so I could find another line of work.
As outragous as the behavior of the police was, it is indicative of two things, the increased militarization of the police and the dysfunction of the city. They got home rule in 1975 and started passing horribly restrictive gun laws, including the one cited in this case.
I as disgusted with the actions of the police, but I have to question why a successful businessman would live in DC and ignore their draconian gun laws.. A city where the locals brag about their city being a school and work free drug zone. Sorry for the highhanded actions by the police, but this was not a test case of a new law. It is a very old law that has been enforced to the letter for a long, long time.
The way this law gets overturned is that Mark Witaschek would have to be convicted and then appeal to a "higher court". That's where the law "may be" overturned. Not exactly a sure thing. Juries are not "supposed to" judge a law's constitutionality. I would speculate that anyone who knows anything about guns would be excused from serving by request of the DC Government.
Those who are caught and decide not to fight usually plead guilty to a lesser charge (and end up not being incarcerated). They hurt the chance of the law being overturned. BUT, how can you blame them for not wanting to risk spending time in prison.
There's the whole idea of jury nullification that does allow for that, but it's a snowball's chance in DC.
Separate names with a comma.