Fenty claims semi-auto handguns still illegal

[Mr_Rogers]

Ants,
It costs very little to FILE a lawsuit. What gets expensive is fighting it when the defendant gets difficult. I am not a lawyer - what I know is from practical experience I would rather have not gained.

Rule one. Get the right attorney - this is difficult. Paper pushing desk jockeys will waste time and bleed you of cash. Early on here you need a good trial attorney. For me that would have worked out less costly in the end. The paper-pushers wasted years. As soon as the trial attorney actually filed suit the other side caved.

Rule two. The idea is not to go to court unless you are forced to do so. If the case presented is as obvious as this one a good trial attorney will probably have the defendant settling before the fight. Defending lawyers don't like to lose - it's bad for business. They will try to arrange some sort of face-saving compromise, it's up to you whether you accept it.

Rule three. There may be some sort of summary judgment available here where a judge will just say this does not need to go to trial. He may say the SC guidance is so obvious that he will simply make an instant decision in your favor.

As I say, I am not a lawyer. I do know that most attorneys will provide free consultation. Check with some attorneys, you may find someone who would take a case just to build a reputation.

 

[brickeyee]

It doesn't matter how DC words it's definitions.

In the law the definition is everything.
The NFA defines 'firearms' FOR PURPOSES OF THE NFA.
If you read the NFA without reading the definition of 'firearm' in that portion of the law you would think almost all guns are banned.

The SC said DC must permit firearms normally in use. Whether DC includes a water-pistol or an anti-tank gun in its restricted firearms list and calls them both WMDs it doesn't matter.

Correct.
DC will have to comply with the ruling.
DC will try to interpret the ruling in the narrowest way they can get away with, until a court tells them otherwise.
They will register a revolver for Heller, since he did NOT challenge the portion of the law that bans semi autos.


Since it did NOT directly strike the law banning semi-auto handguns it MAY take another court case.
Another court MAY very well look at the reasoning in DC v. Heller and overturn the semi auto ban, but the supreme court was NOT asked about that and did NOT answer that question.

 

[Mr_Rogers]

Brickeyee,

DC will try to interpret the ruling in the narrowest way they can get away with, until a court tells them otherwise.

Exactly. What the SC said is pretty specific. The right is an individual right, Justice Scalia pointed out that a handgun is the most appropriate defensive firearm. He also made the point that the ruling applied to firearms in common use.

The DC semi-auto interpretation goes against the accepted technical description of a machine-gun. It also goes against Scalia's "common use" concept. The DC restriction has zero chance of standing and Fenty will experience yet another humiliation.

Fenty could still find some grounds for restrictions - but this isn't one of them.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

The KEY is the "common usage" test set forth by the Heller opinion. It makes no difference what their law says, if it violates "common usage". They will continue to ban. Someone will get arrested, and then show at their trial that semi-autos are in common usage. Then a lower court or the DC circuit will slap them down and clarify the SCOTUS decision.

 

[ctdonath]

The longer DC is obstenant about obeying the spirit of the Heller verdict, the sooner the issue will be simplified to "what part of 'shall not be infringed' don't you understand?"

For all the value of a 157-page verdict, such verbiage can all too often be abused to prolong disobedience. At some point everyone has to stop talking about the issue and someone has to start acting; Fenty needs a good "contempt of court" incarceration right about now.

 

[Prince Yamato]

I'm guessing Scalia didn't specify revolver vs. semi-auto when he wrote "handgun", because he incorrectly assumed that all Americans would have the intelligence to realize that a handgun is a handgun.

They're going to lose the semi-auto ban. So here's the next question, how do we force them to lose the magazine capacity restrictions?

 

[riverdog]

Unfortunately, "magazine capacity restrictions" will probably fall under reasonable restrictions. That said, I'd love to see the "magazine capacity restrictions" go down as unreasonable; I'm in CA and am stuck with the few standard capacity mags I have, can't buy or import any more.

 

[H088]

Considering Magazines for AR-15s and Ak47s are 30+ rounds are what is common, I would say the magazine restrictions would fall.

 

[Robert Hairless]

Unfortunately, "magazine capacity restrictions" will probably fall under reasonable restrictions. That said, I'd love to see the "magazine capacity restrictions" go down as unreasonable; I'm in CA and am stuck with the few high capacity mags I have, can't buy or import any more.

Keep calling them "high capacity" magazines and you'll probably be right about them falling under reasonable restrictions. The word "high" implies "more than ordinary and usual." When Californians get serious they might come to realize that they're being restricted by unconstitutional laws to "limited capacity" or even "low capacity" magazines while criminals face no such restrictions. Criminals can use "standard capacity" magazines such as 30-round magazines for the AR-15 and 17- or even 32-round magazines for 9mm Glock pistols.

"Standard capacity" magazines are any magazines made or authorized by the firearm's manufacturer or any aftermarket manufacturer of magazines for the firearm, or in use by anyone in legal possession of a similar firearm.

If I use one in mine, there's no reason why you should not be allowed to use one in yours except for the arbitrary and unreasonable restrictions imposed on you by your state's government in its blatant attempt to circumvent your Second Amendment rights.

 

[riverdog]

Absolutely correct. I got trapped by the phraseology of the anti-gun types in the media. I've corrected my language, thanks for pointing that out.

 

[divemedic]

What DC is doing actually helps us. Defining a 12 round pistol as a machine gun will make the machine gun ban that much easier to beat.

 

[SCKimberFan]

"Its amazing how hard somone fights aginst citizens rights and freedoms, all these people need to be thrown out ,"

NOW!

 

[brickeyee]

The SC said DC must permit firearms normally in use. Whether DC includes a water-pistol or an anti-tank gun in its restricted firearms list and calls them both WMDs it doesn't matter.

Heller asked for specific DC laws to be overruled.
The court has ONLY struck those EXACT sections.
OTHER sections remain valid, if on shaky ground.

The wording of the decision can supply arguments for subsequent cases to strike other portions of the law, but only the exact sections Hellerman asked the court to rule on are likely to be struck without further court action.

A lower court is likely to accept arguments well grounded in the decision already issued, but it is still going to need a case to move forward.

 

[Deanimator]

Then a lower court or the DC circuit will slap them down and clarify the SCOTUS decision.

Not only THAT, but the person arrested will sue for false arrest and a litany of other civil torts in Federal court. Enough of that, including judgements against police as individuals, and the problem will solve itself.

 

[Igloodude]

Given that Fenty's decision to appeal Heller to SCOTUS in the first place and now his asinine statements regarding semiautomatics and such are smoothing the road to legal gun ownership throughout the country, I've got to think that he's got this hanging in his office:

 

[HeavyDuty]

"Fenty - Savior of our Gun Rights"

Think it'd sell as a T-shirt?

 

[riverdog]

Never interrupt your opposition when they're making a huge mistake.

 

[Deanimator]

Never interrupt your opposition when they're making a huge mistake.

Just as we couldn't have won WWII without the pratfalls of Hitler and Tojo, we couldn't win the gun rights battle without imbeciles like Fenty and Daley.

Fenty's decision to fight Heller in the courts was the strategic equivalent of Hitler's decision to sacrifice the 6th Army. Neither gained anything and lost BIG.

 

[brickeyee]

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." Napoleon Bonaparte

 

[Tyris]

I'm in CA and am stuck with the few standard capacity mags I have, can't buy or import any more.

Well, you CAN, just don't tell anyone - as no possible good can come of it.
I'm sure thousands have done this and the sky hasn't fallen.

-T

 

[madmike]

I wonder when the Antis will figure out Fenty is 100% responsible for this case.

Had he complied lower down, it would STILL be impossible to buy a handgun in DC, since there are no gun stores. This is a zoning issue. No FFL is going to try to take a zoning issue to SCOTUS in hopes of winning. Then, stick on a stiff license fee. It would have taken DECADES for a decision.

Instead, he decided to fight what everyone knew was a losing battle.

As Napoleon said, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Let him demand and screech and publicly wet panties all he wants. He's doing our work for us.

(Yes, I'm still around. My uncle decided we should take a summer working vacation in the Middle East.)

 

[madmike]

Riverdog:

Here's the fine print on standard cap magazines:

Magazines are not serial numbered. There is no "frame" or "receiver."

It is legal to replace any broken part, or rebuild any damaged existing magazine.

So, if you, hypothetically, had four broken magazines, and were able to salvage a base plate from one, a spring from the second, a follower from the third and a body from the fourth, rather than just putting ONE magazine together from the parts, it would be legal to buy parts to repair ALL FOUR magazines.

IANAL, but that's to the best of my knowledge.

 

[Henry Bowman]

(Yes, I'm still around. My uncle decided we should take a summer working vacation in the Middle East.)

Sam?

 

[They Call Me 'E']

I'm rather offended by the insinuation that I would either A. Participate in shooting innocent civilians, American OR otherwise, and B. Standing idly by and watching anyone else do the same.

I am a US Marine, and I am sworn to protect the constitution and the people of my country. Not its Government or it's Leaders.

You've got way less to fear from people like me and my fellows than you do the gangbangers and criminals in the civilian world.

Oh yeah, and I'm only 22 years old.

 

[EOTechRulesAll]

They Call Me 'E'


I am glad to hear that, very glad. Sadly, 25% of US marines surveyed in the mid 1990s do not feel the same way. It's good to hear you're in the 75% category.


Still, with the crap that went down in New Orleans, can you blame citizens who are worried by the authorities? It was the government (and Blackwater) that seized firearms and killed citizens in New Orleans. Criminals did what they also do, commit crimes and harm people, it's what people expect from them. What we don't expect is to be murdered by our own government.