They don't get it

dukalmighty · June 29th, 2008, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Action Alert: Washington DC Already Planning To Restrict Law-Abiding Citizens 2nd Amendment Rights

The following is a memo sent to Washington, DC residents by Cathy Lanier, Washington, DC Chief of Police:

From: Lanier, Cathy (MPD)
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 6:35 PM
Subject: Supreme Court Update

Residents,

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court today struck down part of the District of Columbia's handgun ban. I wanted to drop you a note to let you know the immediate impact of this decision.

The Supreme Court's ruling is limited and leaves intact various other laws that apply to private residents who would purchase handguns or other firearms for home possession. It is important that everyone know that:

a.. First, all firearms must be registered with the Metropolitan Police Department's Firearms Registration Section before they may be lawfully possessed.
a.. Second, automatic and semiautomatic handguns generally remain illegal and may not be registered.
a.. Third, the Supreme Court's ruling is limited to handguns in the home and does not entitle anyone to carry firearms outside his or her own home.

Lastly, although the Court struck the safe storage provision on the ground that it was too broadly written, in my opinion firearms in the home should be kept either unloaded and disassembled or locked.

I will comply with the Court's reading of the Second Amendment in its letter and spirit. At the same time, I will continue to vigorously enforce the District's other gun-related laws. I will also continue to find additional ways to protect the District's residents against the scourge of gun violence.

Residents who want additional information can visit the Metropolitan Police Website at Metropolitan Police Department: Gun Registration. Residents with questions are encouraged to contact the Firearms Registration Section at 202-727-9490.

Sncerely,

Cathy Lanier
Chief of Police

Memo Source: WashingtonPost.com

In her opinion firearms should be kept locked up or disassembled in the home

I think the justices addressed how stupid that law was when it came to defending your home.Also while your searching for ways to help stop gun violence try arming law abiding citizens and watch crime drop overnight ok maybe the victims will be the criminals instead of law abiding citizens,what a buncha morons

ExactlyMyPoint · June 29th, 2008, 02:40 PM

I wonder how she stores her firearms when she goes home.

retsupt99 · June 29th, 2008, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by exactlymypoint

I wonder how she stores her firearms when she goes home.

I'm sure her firearm is empty and she stores the ammo separately...on a shelf right next to her brain which is also stored separately...

I'm also sure that the courts will again educate her

.

Stay armed...stay out of D.C., for a while...stay safe!

KenInColo · June 29th, 2008, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by exactlymypoint

I wonder how she stores her firearms when she goes home.

You forgot? Liberals have one set of rules for themselves and another set of rules for the rest of us.

Wanna bet she has always had direct access to her arms?

Kerbouchard · June 29th, 2008, 03:09 PM

If you think about it from their standpoint, you can understand why they are so adamant about enforcing stricter laws against guns.

They have a mental disconnect. For them, if something is illegal, then it should not happen, thus the best way to prevent something is to make a law against it.

Common sense and a review of any court docket in the country would tend to disprove that theory, but therein lies the problem.

The anti-gun people aren't necessarily anti-self-defense, but they think that if there were no guns then you would not need to defend yourself, thus solving both problems at once.

Some of them truly do live on the other side of the looking glass. You have to remember that we are talking about politicians who have armed security that escort them everywhere. They are not in danger of a man with a baseball bat or a thug with a knife. The only thing that can endanger them is a gun, from long distance, therefore that is where their fears are centered.

So, it's easy to understand where their fears are and what legislation they want enacted, but why is it that a large portion of citizens agree with them? That is also easy to understand.

Your vast majority of people do not wish to think. They wish to be led and promised everything will be alright. If the promises don't work out, it's not the leaders fault, but the people who inhibited that leader(like the court with the Heller decision). When, for your entire life, you have been promised that if you just follow and trust to the government that they will fix all problems, it becomes very difficult to step outside of that mindset and to take your personal safety, finances, education, etc into your own hands.

These aren't people who are evil and want the thugs to run the street. They simply do not understand that the criminals, by definition, are going to break the law no matter what regulations and restrictions are in place. The only people it will ever effect are the law abiding citizens who go through life looking for somebody to protect them.

Unfortunately, some people, like Suzanna Hupp, have to find out the hard way that there isn't always somebody around to protect them.

I carry a gun because I was taught to try to learn the hard lessons from other people's experiences. Some people have to learn the hard way.

Ram Rod · June 29th, 2008, 03:14 PM

Quote:

They don't get it

Some never will.

cvhoss · June 29th, 2008, 03:14 PM

Quote:

I will comply with the Court's reading of the Second Amendment in its letter and spirit.

Quote:

Second, automatic and semiautomatic handguns generally remain illegal and may not be registered.

Sure glad she's complying with the spirit of the decision. I'd bet that the next suit in DC is this nonsense about semi-auto handguns. If I lived in DC (well, first I'd move) and they're worried about my 9mm semi-auto, think I'd have to buy and register one of these.

Hoss

Rob P. · June 29th, 2008, 04:31 PM

I find incredulous the fact that DC is maintaining that semi auto handguns are still illegal. WHERE in the opinion did the court distinguish between handguns and types of handguns? Can someone give me a page number on this

The city seems to think that because they classified semi auto pistols as "machine guns" in some other ordinance that they can still ban them. However, the opinion distinctly said that a ban on handguns is unconstitutional. Doesn't this mean that their ban on semi auto handgun (AKA machinegun) is also unconstitutional? Renaming a pistol as a machine gun and banning it is the same as just banning it directly when the renaming isn't factual or true.

I think that the order by the court enjoining the city will have to be carefully worded to encompass every nuance attempt to evade the result. And the city will still try it anyway and then cry when they are sued over it again and again and again until there is nothing left of their laws banning handguns.

rodc13 · June 29th, 2008, 05:10 PM

They're sure going to be spending a lot more city money on court cases when they could be spending it on something productive.

archer51 · June 29th, 2008, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by retsupt99

I'm sure her firearm is empty and she stores the ammo separately...on a shelf right next to her brain which is also stored separately...
I'm also sure that the courts will again educate her

.

Stay armed...stay out of D.C., for a while...stay safe!

Well if her firearm is stored empty next to her brain it will have good company, since her brain is empty as well!!

June 29th, 2008, 02:40 PM	#2
ExactlyMyPoint Distinguished Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 1,535	I wonder how she stores her firearms when she goes home. __________________ - Let me explain. No. There is not time. Let me summarize. - Doing my part to create a huge carbon footprint - Be still, and know that I am God; Psalms 46:10 - You are God and that's just the way it is; You Are God Alone sung by Phillips Craig And Dean

June 29th, 2008, 03:09 PM	#5
Kerbouchard VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 2,531	If you think about it from their standpoint, you can understand why they are so adamant about enforcing stricter laws against guns. They have a mental disconnect. For them, if something is illegal, then it should not happen, thus the best way to prevent something is to make a law against it. Common sense and a review of any court docket in the country would tend to disprove that theory, but therein lies the problem. The anti-gun people aren't necessarily anti-self-defense, but they think that if there were no guns then you would not need to defend yourself, thus solving both problems at once. Some of them truly do live on the other side of the looking glass. You have to remember that we are talking about politicians who have armed security that escort them everywhere. They are not in danger of a man with a baseball bat or a thug with a knife. The only thing that can endanger them is a gun, from long distance, therefore that is where their fears are centered. So, it's easy to understand where their fears are and what legislation they want enacted, but why is it that a large portion of citizens agree with them? That is also easy to understand. Your vast majority of people do not wish to think. They wish to be led and promised everything will be alright. If the promises don't work out, it's not the leaders fault, but the people who inhibited that leader(like the court with the Heller decision). When, for your entire life, you have been promised that if you just follow and trust to the government that they will fix all problems, it becomes very difficult to step outside of that mindset and to take your personal safety, finances, education, etc into your own hands. These aren't people who are evil and want the thugs to run the street. They simply do not understand that the criminals, by definition, are going to break the law no matter what regulations and restrictions are in place. The only people it will ever effect are the law abiding citizens who go through life looking for somebody to protect them. Unfortunately, some people, like Suzanna Hupp, have to find out the hard way that there isn't always somebody around to protect them. I carry a gun because I was taught to try to learn the hard lessons from other people's experiences. Some people have to learn the hard way. __________________ Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever. http://miscmusings.townhall.com/ Who is John Galt?

June 29th, 2008, 05:10 PM	#9
rodc13 VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: San Antonio, Texas Posts: 2,390	They're sure going to be spending a lot more city money on court cases when they could be spending it on something productive. __________________ Cheers, Rod "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

June 29th, 2008, 04:31 PM	#8
Rob P. Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: In the sticks Posts: 138	I find incredulous the fact that DC is maintaining that semi auto handguns are still illegal. WHERE in the opinion did the court distinguish between handguns and types of handguns? Can someone give me a page number on this The city seems to think that because they classified semi auto pistols as "machine guns" in some other ordinance that they can still ban them. However, the opinion distinctly said that a ban on handguns is unconstitutional. Doesn't this mean that their ban on semi auto handgun (AKA machinegun) is also unconstitutional? Renaming a pistol as a machine gun and banning it is the same as just banning it directly when the renaming isn't factual or true. I think that the order by the court enjoining the city will have to be carefully worded to encompass every nuance attempt to evade the result. And the city will still try it anyway and then cry when they are sued over it again and again and again until there is nothing left of their laws banning handguns.