Last edited:
interesting bits of info on gun ownership
- Thread starter Grumpy
- Start date
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-washingtondc-idUSKBN1AA27U
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/25/dc-law-requiring-good-reason-carry-handgun-rejecte/
(Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday blocked a gun regulation in Washington, D.C., that limited the right to carry a handgun in public to those with a special need for self-defense, handing a victory to gun rights advocates.\
(THIS CLAUSE IN CITY ORDINANCES, WAS USED FOR DECADES TO LIMIT PERMITS TO A FEW POLITICALLY CONNECTED MEMBERS OF THE POPULATION) GRUMPY
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit's 2-1 ruling struck down the local government's third major attempt in 40 years to limit handgun rights, citing what it said was scant but clear guidance from the U.S. Supreme Court on the right to bear arms.
The District of Columbia may appeal the three-judge panel's ruling to the full appeals court,
potentially a more favorable audience as seven of its 11 members were appointed by Democratic presidents.
(DEMS FREQUENTLY TRY TO LEGISLATE THROUGH, APPOINTING ACTIVIST JUDGES,
WHEN THEY KNOW THEY CAN,T PUSH THE SOCIALIST AGENDA THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE) GRUMPY
All three of the panel members involved in Tuesday's ruling are Republican appointees.
Judge Thomas Griffith, writing the majority opinion, said constitutional challenges to gun laws "create peculiar puzzles for the courts," noting that the U.S. Supreme Court's first in-depth review "is younger than the first iPhone."
That 2008 ruling in a landmark case called District of Columbia v. Heller struck down a D.C. law that banned all handgun possession in the city.
It was a major victory for supporters of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects gun ownership rights.
The city council tried again to ban carrying weapons, a law that was also struck down by the courts, and now is trying a third time to restrict the right to carry handguns in the city.
Griffith wrote that the Supreme Court's Heller ruling made it clear that "the Second Amendment erects some absolute barriers that no gun law may breach."
Some ambiguity exists due to the first 13 words of the Second Amendment, which reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The D.C. law that is being challenged directs the police chief to create rules limiting those who can carry handguns to people showing good reason to need one.
Writing a dissenting opinion, Judge Karen Henderson cited case law finding that the "core" right to bear arms is for self-defense inside the home.
"Regulations restricting public carrying are all the more compelling in a geographically small but heavily populated urban area like the District," Henderson said.
The National Rifle Association and the office of D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser had no immediate comment.
Reporting by Daniel Trotta; Editing by Tom Brown
(YOU CAN,T HAVE A SOCIALIST POLICE STATE,
WHERE ONLY THE ELITE ARE ARMED ,
and WHERE THE GOVERNMENT, CONTROLLING ELITE ,MANDATE, THE POPULATION FOLLOWS ITS RULES,
IF THE PEOPLE RETAIN THE RIGHT TO INDIVIDUAL ARMED SELF DEFENSE
< FREE SPEECH AND THE ABILITY TO VOTE OUT THEIR REPRESENTATIVES IN GOVERNMENT) GRUMPY
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/25/dc-law-requiring-good-reason-carry-handgun-rejecte/
(Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday blocked a gun regulation in Washington, D.C., that limited the right to carry a handgun in public to those with a special need for self-defense, handing a victory to gun rights advocates.\
(THIS CLAUSE IN CITY ORDINANCES, WAS USED FOR DECADES TO LIMIT PERMITS TO A FEW POLITICALLY CONNECTED MEMBERS OF THE POPULATION) GRUMPY
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit's 2-1 ruling struck down the local government's third major attempt in 40 years to limit handgun rights, citing what it said was scant but clear guidance from the U.S. Supreme Court on the right to bear arms.
The District of Columbia may appeal the three-judge panel's ruling to the full appeals court,
potentially a more favorable audience as seven of its 11 members were appointed by Democratic presidents.
(DEMS FREQUENTLY TRY TO LEGISLATE THROUGH, APPOINTING ACTIVIST JUDGES,
WHEN THEY KNOW THEY CAN,T PUSH THE SOCIALIST AGENDA THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE) GRUMPY
All three of the panel members involved in Tuesday's ruling are Republican appointees.
Judge Thomas Griffith, writing the majority opinion, said constitutional challenges to gun laws "create peculiar puzzles for the courts," noting that the U.S. Supreme Court's first in-depth review "is younger than the first iPhone."
That 2008 ruling in a landmark case called District of Columbia v. Heller struck down a D.C. law that banned all handgun possession in the city.
It was a major victory for supporters of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects gun ownership rights.
The city council tried again to ban carrying weapons, a law that was also struck down by the courts, and now is trying a third time to restrict the right to carry handguns in the city.
Griffith wrote that the Supreme Court's Heller ruling made it clear that "the Second Amendment erects some absolute barriers that no gun law may breach."
Some ambiguity exists due to the first 13 words of the Second Amendment, which reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The D.C. law that is being challenged directs the police chief to create rules limiting those who can carry handguns to people showing good reason to need one.
Writing a dissenting opinion, Judge Karen Henderson cited case law finding that the "core" right to bear arms is for self-defense inside the home.
"Regulations restricting public carrying are all the more compelling in a geographically small but heavily populated urban area like the District," Henderson said.
The National Rifle Association and the office of D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser had no immediate comment.
Reporting by Daniel Trotta; Editing by Tom Brown
(YOU CAN,T HAVE A SOCIALIST POLICE STATE,
WHERE ONLY THE ELITE ARE ARMED ,
and WHERE THE GOVERNMENT, CONTROLLING ELITE ,MANDATE, THE POPULATION FOLLOWS ITS RULES,
IF THE PEOPLE RETAIN THE RIGHT TO INDIVIDUAL ARMED SELF DEFENSE
< FREE SPEECH AND THE ABILITY TO VOTE OUT THEIR REPRESENTATIVES IN GOVERNMENT) GRUMPY
Last edited:
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
the news media is intent on ignoring hundreds of stories that show average people ,
using firearms to stop or prevent violent criminals robbing and killing people.
theres literally thousands of times a week that normal and average people ,
in this country, have used, firearms in a logical and responsible way,
for self protection, yet the media constantly lies or mis-represents the truth.
one only has too look at the liberal paradise,s of chicago, and detroit to see the results,
of making it almost impossible for the average person to own a firearm or use it for self defense,
by making the legal use so restricted its virtually impossible to legally use a firearm in self defense.
yes theres a lot more factors that mater, in crime, like the mix of race,s, average income, crime prevention, like strict sentencing ,
but in states that strictly enforce a three strikes your out laws and allow easy to access concealed carry laws, crime consistently goes down,\
as always there is a risk vs reward balance,
when you increase the risk of being shot or arrested,
and or,spending a great deal of time in jail,
for committing violent crimes
the lure of easy money from crime ,
seems to go down, rapidly,
RESTRICTED LIBERAL CITY (roughly 2.7 million population)
http://heyjackass.com/
the news media is intent on ignoring hundreds of stories that show average people ,
using firearms to stop or prevent violent criminals robbing and killing people.
theres literally thousands of times a week that normal and average people ,
in this country, have used, firearms in a logical and responsible way,
for self protection, yet the media constantly lies or mis-represents the truth.
one only has too look at the liberal paradise,s of chicago, and detroit to see the results,
of making it almost impossible for the average person to own a firearm or use it for self defense,
by making the legal use so restricted its virtually impossible to legally use a firearm in self defense.
yes theres a lot more factors that mater, in crime, like the mix of race,s, average income, crime prevention, like strict sentencing ,
but in states that strictly enforce a three strikes your out laws and allow easy to access concealed carry laws, crime consistently goes down,\
as always there is a risk vs reward balance,
when you increase the risk of being shot or arrested,
and or,spending a great deal of time in jail,
for committing violent crimes
the lure of easy money from crime ,
seems to go down, rapidly,
RESTRICTED LIBERAL CITY (roughly 2.7 million population)
http://heyjackass.com/
Last edited: