DC just unveiled its new restrictions...

[RPCVYemen]

even though it is DC, I'm sure you can just leave your gun loaded and unlocked in your house and just tell the police you were very fast to remove the lock in the event of an incident.

Yeah, perjury in a weapons case is a great strategy. Judges think perjury is cuter than a basket of puppies.

I say - perjure yourself frequently and often - especially if you had to use the weapon! There is extra bliss in that.

The coolest of all cool is to perjure yourself when there's a dead body lying on the floor.

Mike

 

[Novus Collectus]

And do you think that, upon tracing the firearm back to the LEGAL owner, they will just say "oh here's your stolen property and you can have it back"? Somehow I think it's going to be more along the lines of dumping all the blame on the LEGAL owner for "allowing" the evil and murderous weapon to be stolen. In other words the owner will get victimized twice and will be crucified in the press to boot.

I have to look again to be sure, but I think there is something in DC code laying out the process for getting your gun back, but I think the proof is on the owner that they either did not know it was stolen (like a family member took it out of the house for instance), or they had nothing to do with the person having the firearm.
If the handgun was reported stolen prior to recovery, I think they have to give it back after it is no longer used as evidence for trial.

 

[RP88]

That sounds right. But the requirement to keep a gun inoperative will probably come into play if a gun is stolen from a residence and it is not inoperative.

good point. But, at the same time, trigger locks arent gonna keep a thief out of a gun for more than the time it takes for him to find a way to remove it without the key. Unless the lock costs as much as the gun, you can bet that it won't matter if the gun is locked up or not.

Yeah, perjury in a weapons case is a great strategy. Judges think perjury is cuter than a basket of puppies.

I say - perjure yourself frequently and often - especially if you had to use the weapon! There is extra bliss in that.

The coolest of all cool is to perjure yourself when there's a dead body lying on the floor.

all you have to say is that you perceived an immediate threat, according to the law.

 

[Rachen]

I think this whole DC issue has become a matter of stomach and heart rather than the politicians.

If only all of the DC residents support the 2nd Amendment and oppose the gun registration with such dedication and heart, the megalomaniacs would not have been able to "unveil" all of these new BS laws.

Imagine if the entire city of DC stood up in full and solid support of RKBA, staging massive job walkouts and sit-down strikes, parading the streets with millions of signs, flags, and banners, stopping all traffic, shutting down the entire transportation system. Just think about how different would the RKBA situation would have been. And even better, if Chicago citizens and New Yorkers did the same thing as their comrades in Washington.

The gun owner community is lacking a strong, central leadership. The NRA is good, but we need a strong and centralized bureaucracy that is able to connect millions of people, and initiate mass rallies and parades whenever a 2nd Amendment crisis comes up.

 

[Thernlund]

Having just breezed over the posts from when I left the thread yesterday, I've got this...

To paraphrase a sentiment put forth often...

...I'm glad I don't live in D.C....

Understand this...

You do live in D.C.

If Washington D.C. is allowed to basically give the finger to the Supreme Court, what kind of precedent does that set for the rest of us? What happens the next time the high court makes a ruling, maybe in your state, and your state government decides they don't like it. No biggie. They can just cite D.C. as case law where a Supreme Court decision was ignored.

This, people, is the beginning of the end. This is how it starts.

D.C. making an end run around the high courts ruling is nothing short of 100% unacceptable in every way.

Unacceptable.


-T.

 

[redneckrepairs]

IMHO DC will continue to play the same game they have . There is a preemtion bill in congress to cut the bs in view of heller , but we will see where it goes , and frankly i am not sure i am comfortable with federal preemption .

 

[ZeSpectre]

frankly i am not sure i am comfortable with federal preemption

Me either, but then again if we had Federal preemption maybe we'd have a slightly smaller set of UNIFORM rules to deal with. Sure would make lobby efforts much more simple and focused.

 

[M203Sniper]

We will see if any of this matters when election season comes and goes. If the same idiots are still in office telling the criminal and middle class what they can't do then all of this is just wasted breath.

I am waiting for America to put Americans in office.

Stop voting for socialist scum.

It will soon come to a point where it is truly Us v. Them and none of Us want to live in that time.

 

[ilbob]

IMHO DC will continue to play the same game they have . There is a preemtion bill in congress to cut the bs in view of heller , but we will see where it goes , and frankly i am not sure i am comfortable with federal preemption .

I am opposed to the feds deciding what goes on in individual states, for the most part. DC is not a state. They should never, ever have been given any kind of self rule, or any number of votes in the electoral college. But that is water under the bridge.

OTOH, it is probably better to let things play themselves out in the courts rather than have congress screw it up by "fixing" things.

 

[Eric F]

This all makes perfect sense to me. See I work for the Feds(non leo) and I know how things work.

WDC Leaders likely preaproved all of this "In case they lost".

Ok we are going to loose this one what can we do. We must allow the public to have guns. Idea! they can have a gun but we will make it so tough no one will want to jump through all the hoops. Ok $500 licens fee, then pass a test then pass a more strict background check. Then you can still have a gun but it must be kept unloaded unless there is a confirmed threat in your house.

typical the long time excuse of your not being restricted you can have a gun if.........line of crap. this totaly sucks and will likely stick too. Or be held up in court for years

 

[.cheese.]

not surprised.

It's ridiculous nonetheless.

I wonder if at some point criminal charges will be threatened against the D.C. authorities.

 

[makarovnik]

They still don't have it right. They need more pressure and need to go back to the drawing board. We should have the same right to defend ourselves as the police, do we not?

 

[FCFC]

Quote:
Nah, that's a slippery slope argument. Weak.

Really? Ask the folks that live in Chicago...

Registration and/or licensing are necessary components for regulation, because you can’t regulate that which you don’t know about.

They are already trying to use ...

That's the old argument. About to be made obsolete due to the Heller decison.

See, here's why: Chicago. Chicago will be next on the chopping block. Although Chicago today has total control over handguns, in the near future it will lose much of the control they now enjoy. Chicago will be forced to allow handgun ownership to its citizens. I know it, you know it, even that jowly excuse for a boss in Chicago knows it. Matter of time.

All the legal handguns in Chicago are already registered. Any new legal handguns in Chicago will have to be legal because of law change required by Heller.

Will the city of Chicago require registration of all new legal handguns? Is the Pope Polish?

But the key is whether registration is "reasonable regulation" satisfying Heller. The most important pointis that lawful Chicagoans will soon have handguns in their homes again. They're gonna be pretty happy about that.

Any other places in the U.S. where registration is imposed and gun ownership is allowed? Has it worked? Can people own guns for self defense in those places?

Registration is a bad or useless thing, to be sure. But the next advancing step is one of putting legal handguns in Chicago homes. That's less control for old red-face jowly-man.

 

[CountGlockula]

At least DC can have 12 round mags, we're stuck with 10.

 

[H088]

Any gun that can possibly accept more then a 12 round mag is still banned in DC, in Cali you can own guns that could have more then 10 rounds, you just can't have the mags.

The DC law will fall apart when it comes to court, its just Fently wanting to show everyone the finger.

 

[La Pistoletta]

It's like a rogue state, isn't it? DC should be dissolved and its land become a remote area of Texas.

 

[hoji]

It's like a rogue state, isn't it? DC should be dissolved and its land become a remote area of Texas.

We don't want it. Give it to Virginia.

 

[Huddog]

DC a true farce. The Anti gun people will never cease to try to find ways around the law. Even if it means passing new laws which even at first appearance fail the newest decision. It will still take years for the new version to be challenged and reach the Supreme Court. This is just the first of many anti stunts to tie up the Court system over this. Remember the 4th ammendment used to mean what it said before all the exceptions were implemented through SC decisions.

 

[Deanimator]

But the key is whether registration is "reasonable regulation" satisfying Heller. The most important pointis that lawful Chicagoans will soon have handguns in their homes again. They're gonna be pretty happy about that.

That's the deliciously ironic part, isn't it?

All along they've been LYING about wanting "reasonable gun controls" and now that they've been given them, they're howling. It's like the vampire who asked for extra garlic on his pizza and a scotch and holy water, then actually had to consume them.

Beware what you ask for...

 

[rugerman07]

This doesn't surprise me at all. It's like I said, in an earlier post, "HELLER WON'T CHANGE A THING". The 2nd Amendment should have been incorporated, which it wasn't, so don't expect any lawsuits by the NRA, GOA, etc., to repeal any anti-gun laws to have any positive effect. The states' still have the last word.

 

[Soybomb]

The 2nd Amendment should have been incorporated, which it wasn't, so don't expect any lawsuits by the NRA, GOA, etc., to repeal any anti-gun laws to have any positive effect.

What supreme court case do you think should have brought us incorporation?

 

[Tyris]

I am opposed to the feds deciding what goes on in individual states.

What do you think the federal AWB did?

Federal preemption would either maintain status-quo (most places), or it would LOOSEN the existing laws in east-coast crap holes and CA.

Federal preemption would rock. It would beat up fascist states like NJ, NY, CA, MA. Preemption would be the opposite of the AWB, and would force the AWB-compliant states to accept a less restrictive set of laws.

Since states cannot "legalize" things that are banned at the federal level, there is nothing to lose by preemption. Everyone wins, no more crap about driving through this state or that with a rifle in the trunk.

It is clear that some states are hell bent on abusing their "states rights" with more restrictive laws, they need a federal kick to the teeth.

Federal preemption has no downside.

-T

 

[PercyShelley]

In the grand tradition of Federal Enforcement of civil rights decisions by the Supreme Court, I say that the National Guard should be dispatched to ensure that the local government complies with the ruling.

 

[rero360]

Hey, I'll gladly volunteer my unit to go down there and enforce the SC's ruling, it should be a gun giveback, national guard troops going around giving fireamarms and ammunition to the citizens. the thought of that warms my heart.

 

[csmkersh]

​