tyeo098
Member
Bollocks. Oh well. Glad I visited while I could!
DC Carry ruling... finally
- Thread starter AFRetired
- Start date
- Status
mgkdrgn
Member
PLEASE note the last 1/2 of the last sentence in this. (and by "this" I meant the police dept instructions)
".... but other charges may apply."
Trust me, you are going to get charged with something, and your gun will be confiscated (if you don't agree with that, then you'll be "resisting"). If you don't believe me, just go try it.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Pssst... a bunch of guys HAVE been trying it. No charges yet.
But now we have to wait to see how things play out during the 90 day stay.
F-111 John
Member
Delete
Last edited:
tyeo098
Member
Youuuuuu should read the whole thread
myself.. I mean really said:Well since I live within spittings distance of that cesspool...
Why not? Seems the police chief had a word out we would be there...
The only cop we saw immediately turned their lights on and reversed at full speed.
Then got out and ran into a pizza place. Came out 5 mins later w/ pizza and left.
Oh well. I was hoping to get a pic w/ da po-po.
I have a feeling that they hope someone who is carrying does something stupid so that they can use it as ammunition in an appeal. What they need and want is incidents that will support an argument that the most restrictive controls are needed to insure public safety.
Unfortunately they're some that may provide them with what they expect. :banghead:
Unfortunately they're some that may provide them with what they expect. :banghead:
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
That's EXACTLY why I'm about halfway relieved that they said it does not apply to long guns. If they said it was wide open you just know there'd be a delegation from one of our more exuberant groups with a busload of dudes with AR-15s and AKs heading into town to do their photo-op on the Capital steps. While someday I hope to be there myself, not this month, not this year. Take it slow, be gracious winners, and don't BLOW it.
tyeo098
Member
Capitol grounds are 100% off limits. Its a felony to traverse said grounds while carrying.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/40/5104
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/40/5104
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Ahhh, so it would be good to have a map that shows the 1,000 radii around schools, AND the exact limits of the Capitol grounds.
AlexanderA
Member
The D.C. City Council will probably copy Maryland's carry law. Which is to say, getting a permit will be practically impossible. "Things must change so that things can remain the same."
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Hasn't that already been dealt with? I mean, folks ARE now able to register and/or purchase firearms in the District which was impossible now.
And the judge just said they cannot enforce the law that requires a separate permit to carry.
So, while it is a bit more of a pain for a District resident to own guns than it is for the rest of us, once they own them, they can carry them.
And the rest of us visitors are good to go...
NOT LEGAL ADVICE:
Sam, the judge's original order said that the current DC laws - which forbid carry and have no real mechanism for obtaining a permit allowing carry - cannot be enforced. The ruling said nothing about whether a narrow "may issue" law, as opposed to a "shall issue" law, would pass muster.
And, as of right now, the decision is stayed for 90 days. During which time DC will amend its laws (and perhaps be challenged again) or appeal or do both.
Sam, the judge's original order said that the current DC laws - which forbid carry and have no real mechanism for obtaining a permit allowing carry - cannot be enforced. The ruling said nothing about whether a narrow "may issue" law, as opposed to a "shall issue" law, would pass muster.
And, as of right now, the decision is stayed for 90 days. During which time DC will amend its laws (and perhaps be challenged again) or appeal or do both.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
That's true. But it seems clear by the way things have been going for them that a prohibitively difficult process won't pass review.
CoalTrain49
Member
Be sure to take plenty of change.
gun_with_a_view
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2014
- Messages
- 471
That passage from the decision (p.16) seemingly refers to a CCW permitting scheme. Whether one is constitutional or not remains an open question. But His Honor seems convinced from the outset that freedom from the existing laws, now stayed, hangs on getting a permit from the law.
mgkdrgn
Member
Register ... yes. I think the entire process takes about 3 days based on all the places you have to visit.
Purchase ... not so much. There are NO gun stores in the District, and the city council has made it quite clear that there will never be a gun store in the District as long as they draw breath.
You must purchase your gun elsewhere and have it transferred to you in DC via the ONLY FFL in DC that deals with the public. He is part time, and I think is currently working out of a District police station as he can't get approval for his "premises" anywhere else in the district.
Oh, and if I recall his transfer fee is North of $150.
AlexanderA
Member
Maryland splits purchase/possession from carrying. These are two different permits, and the carry permit is "may issue" verging on "no issue." That is, the requisite "good and substantial reason" can almost never be documented. This scheme has apparently passed constitutional muster.
All the District needs to do is copy the Maryland scheme, and Judge Scullin's conditions can be complied with, while in substance nothing really changes. It appears that what really bothered Judge Scullin was that there was no permit procedure at all for carrying.
All the District needs to do is copy the Maryland scheme, and Judge Scullin's conditions can be complied with, while in substance nothing really changes. It appears that what really bothered Judge Scullin was that there was no permit procedure at all for carrying.
F-111 John
Member
May Issue has been upheld in New Jersey and struck down in California. We're going to eventually see the Supremes weigh in on May Issue but it may be four years from now.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
I have imagined this. And, despite a lot of online searching, I haven't found anything documentable on police agencies doing any kind of "1,000 foot traps" for people carrying weapons around school zones. I rather imagine that pretty much all issues with guns in such zones are on indesputable grounds. This way the question can never come up in court.
I imagine that if something like this were to actually happen, this could potentially open up a real can of worms for the government. The question which would come up would be HOW, exactly, any given citizen would know EXACTLY where this 1,000 foot boundary is without it being properly surveyed and posted. Not only is this boundary not known with ANY accuracy around ANY school, it's also even more difficult in cases where the various school properties that aren't immediately adjacent to some schools aren't really clear to the public.
Knowing what the gun laws say is the responsibility of every gun owner. Complying with said gun laws is likewise the responsibility of every gun owner. But if the police are going to press charges based on "surveyed maps", then the citizens must also have access to those same surveyed maps OR the boundaries must be clearly posted.
Last edited:
It is easy to fall into the 1000 foot zone as illustrated by this site.
"1,000 Feet is Further Than You Think"
http://www.prisonpolicy.org/zones/thousand_feet.html
"We set out to discover whether people can be seen 1,000 feet from a school under ideal circumstances. One author then stood on the school’s property line and took pictures of another author at various distances from the property. Each image at left is a closeup of the actual photograph at right. "
.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
DC is still going to tread softly, apparently.
Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier has since rescinded orders instructing officers not to make arrests in such cases.
“We must recognize that members of the public may not be aware that all firearms laws in the District are once again in effect,” she wrote in an updated order issued Tuesday. “Officers are reminded to handle all matters regarding firearms with caution.”
In otherwords, even though all the old laws are not back in effect for the immediate future, they intend to tread softly so as NOT to make things more difficult on themselves in the process.
How these matters are played out is like a game of chess...the goal is NOT to make a stupid move that will give your opponent an advantage that may end up costing you the game. If they come down hard on people and end up making more "clear cut" court cases that could go against them in the future, then they lose ground. If they play it right and don't cause waves, then they have time to work out alternate plans and possibly make a play in the appeals process.
What this means is that people like myself, who are legally allowed to carry in our home state, need to toe the line as well. We still have to respect the law, and right now that means we can't legally carry in DC until this latest maneuver is resolved, at the very least. OUR job is to play the game of chess smartly, too, and not give our opponents any advantage which could result in us losing the game.
Hang in there!
Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier has since rescinded orders instructing officers not to make arrests in such cases.
“We must recognize that members of the public may not be aware that all firearms laws in the District are once again in effect,” she wrote in an updated order issued Tuesday. “Officers are reminded to handle all matters regarding firearms with caution.”
In otherwords, even though all the old laws are not back in effect for the immediate future, they intend to tread softly so as NOT to make things more difficult on themselves in the process.
How these matters are played out is like a game of chess...the goal is NOT to make a stupid move that will give your opponent an advantage that may end up costing you the game. If they come down hard on people and end up making more "clear cut" court cases that could go against them in the future, then they lose ground. If they play it right and don't cause waves, then they have time to work out alternate plans and possibly make a play in the appeals process.
What this means is that people like myself, who are legally allowed to carry in our home state, need to toe the line as well. We still have to respect the law, and right now that means we can't legally carry in DC until this latest maneuver is resolved, at the very least. OUR job is to play the game of chess smartly, too, and not give our opponents any advantage which could result in us losing the game.
Hang in there!
swinokur
Member
MD law was settled in the 4 CA, not the DC Circuit. The apparent constitutionality of may issue applies to the 4CA ruling, of which DC is a not a part. DC is in the DC circuit. 4 CA rulings don't apply.
Judge Scullin applied 14A equal protection rules in the DC ruling, meaning DC cannot prohibit non DC residents from some kind of carry. His narrow ruling would prohibit a MD style may issue G&S scheme IMO.
And DC cannot enforce the GFSZA. it's a Federal statute. They could call US Marshals to arrest however. I don't see this happening. It is sometimes added on to other charges from what I've read.
IANAL but live 3 miles from DC.
From the ruling:
This seems to rule out a MD style requirement for Good and Substantial reason to carry.The right to self defense is all that's needed. That sounds like shall issue to me.
Judge Scullin applied 14A equal protection rules in the DC ruling, meaning DC cannot prohibit non DC residents from some kind of carry. His narrow ruling would prohibit a MD style may issue G&S scheme IMO.
And DC cannot enforce the GFSZA. it's a Federal statute. They could call US Marshals to arrest however. I don't see this happening. It is sometimes added on to other charges from what I've read.
IANAL but live 3 miles from DC.
From the ruling:
This seems to rule out a MD style requirement for Good and Substantial reason to carry.The right to self defense is all that's needed. That sounds like shall issue to me.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
