D.C. Gun Ban Dead {Merged}

[paramedic70002]

So residents of DC aren't citizens of the United States? Maybe they should stop paying federal taxes!

SCOTUS will probably dodge the issue and refuse to hear the case, sending it back to the original court for disposition.

[goawayfarm]

I'm not a lawyer, but this decision doesn't address repealing concealed carry laws.

So the way I see it, NO don't carry in DC.

It also doesn't prevent DC from registration of firearms, it just repeals the ban on having a working firearm in your home.

DC will adopt NYC style permit requirements -- that is that you must be 'connected' to get one.

[jednp]

I honestly think that there are only 2 ways that the Supreme Court will take on this. It's either one or the other, I don't see them doing it any other way.

A: they hear the case and rule that the ban was unconstitutional and that the right to keep and bear arms IS an individual right.

B: They refuse to hear the case, because there is a strong chance they would rule that it ISN'T an individual right. And they all know what would happen if that ruling came down in this country. I don't think they'd risk it.

[jednp]

So how does it work now, we can carry in DC until SCOTUS says otherwise?

the ruling did nothing to address people being able to carry guns in D.C. but just said they have the right to have them in their home, assembled and ready to go for protection.

Concealed carry and open carry I think will still be off limits. But this is a good start if it sticks!

[Tom G]

This had to happen. Someone has finally made an intelligent decision that has long been overdue. For a while I thought DC might have been turning into a Great Britton clone.

[kf4uel]

This is great....even if it comes to restircted gun rights in DC its still better than nothing..

[RETSUPT99]

Stay armed...(in D.C. get armed)...stay safe!

ret

[JayHawker45]

I honestly think that there are only 2 ways that the Supreme Court will take on this. It's either one or the other, I don't see them doing it any other way.

A: they hear the case and rule that the ban was unconstitutional and that the right to keep and bear arms IS an individual right.

B: They refuse to hear the case, because there is a strong chance they would rule that it ISN'T an individual right. And they all know what would happen if that ruling came down in this country. I don't think they'd risk it.

Chances are it will go to the Supreme Court in that we have two competing rulings by two different Federal Courts, the US Court of Appeals, District of Columbia, says 2A guarantees individual rights, while I believe the 9th United States District Court ruled that 2A only guarantees collective rights. Anytime there is a discrepancy between Federal Courts, the Supreme Court is the final arbiter.

This whole issue might have gone to the Supreme Court earlier if the previous decision of the 5th Circuit Court had ruled in a binding opinion that the 2A was a guarantor of individual rights...their ruling was non binding.

[sgtD]

Rush Limbaugh pimping it now... should be all over the mainstream media tonight.

I have not heard a word so far on the mainstream media. Probably won't, beause it doesn't fit their editorial agenda.

edit: My Dad just told me that they did mention it on the CBS news tonight.

[Redneck Repairs]

fox had it on at about 1:30 pm mountain time . Just a blurb explaining it , no editorialising .

[gddyup]

Nothing on CNN.com about this anywhere........

I had to find out via my local WMUR website. I also found it on Foxnews.

Interesting.....


I hope this is the turning point we have all been looking for.

[Doc Holliday]

Good news, especially with the storm clouds that we face off in the distance.

[goawayfarm]

From VCDL:

Here are some of the stories and polls on the DC Gun Ban reversal
that occurred today (thanks to EM Mike Stollenwerk for the
compilation):

Poll on lower right side: http://www.nbc4.com/index.html

Another poll: http://www.wtop.com/

http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0307/404231.html, with video

http://tinyurl.com/3yraon, with video

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258067,00.html

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2938719

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2554309.shtml

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070309/..._us/dc_gun_ban

--

Note that the ruling doesn't address carry of a handgun outside the
home. That question wasn't asked and they didn't answer it. But it
is clear to me based on their wording that a total ban on carrying a
handgun outside of the home would not be constitutional either.

Perhaps this will open the door for open carry or at least a
'shall-issue' concealed carry permit.

The Court seemed to support the concept of needing a permit to carry
a concealed handgun, but not an openly carried one. The Court also
overthrew the ban on loaded and assembled handguns.

*** According to Fox news, the DC police are going to continue to
enforce their gun ban until an appeal is heard, so be careful if you
live in the District. ***

This is NOT the end of the story, folks. It will most assuredly be
appealed to the whole Circuit Court and probably all the way to the
Supreme Court.

So buckle your seat belts. The security of our right to keep and
bear arms across the nation will be riding on those courts.

[Team American]

I just couldn't help myself...I went to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence website to see how they were taking the news, and found this:

Washington, D.C. – Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, issued the following statement:

“The 2-1 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Parker v. District of Columbia striking down the District of Columbia’s handgun law is judicial activism at its worst. By disregarding nearly seventy years of U.S. Supreme Court precedent, two Federal judges have negated the democratically-expressed will of the people of the District of Columbia and deprived this community of a gun law it enacted thirty years ago and still strongly supports.

“This ruling represents the first time in American history that a Federal appeals court has struck down a gun law on Second Amendment grounds. While acknowledging that ‘reasonable restrictions’ to promote ‘the government’s interest in public safety’ are permitted by the Second Amendment, the two-judge majority substituted its policy preferences for those of the elected representatives of the District of Columbia. ”

.

[Anubis]

I even heard it on NPR this afternoon, around 15:15 MST. The announcer mentioned that it was a Big Deal, and specifically pointed out that the court decision stated that the law was a violation of 2A.