Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: 2A under siege: Judge upholds restrictive D.C. gun ban,

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156

    2A under siege: Judge upholds restrictive D.C. gun ban,

    A federal judge on Thursday ruled that a D.C. law requiring guns to be registered, mandating safety training and limiting the number of firearms purchases per month do not violate Second Amendment protections of the right to bear arms.

    U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg dismissed with prejudice a sweeping challenge to the District’s handgun laws brought by a group of plaintiffs led by Dick Anthony Heller.

    http://media.washtimes.com/media/mis...i-decision.pdf

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...challenging-d/
    Last edited by Nightmare; 05-15-2014 at 02:47 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    11
    Utter CRAP!!!!! Deep pockets go a looooong way in this country.

  3. #3
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    A federal judge on Thursday ruled that a D.C. law requiring guns to be registered, mandating safety training and limiting the number of firearms purchases per month do not violate Second Amendment protections of the right to bear arms.

    U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg dismissed with prejudice a sweeping challenge to the District’s handgun laws brought by a group of plaintiffs led by Dick Anthony Heller.

    http://media.washtimes.com/media/mis...i-decision.pdf

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...challenging-d/
    What utter CRAP indeed!

    This "Judge" has written that the DC "one-gun-a-month" restriction is fair because "the purchase of 12 guns a year should be enough for anyone..."
    Air Force Veteran
    NRA Life Member
    VCDL Member
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety, Personal Protection
    Maryland Qualified Handgun Instructor
    Certified Instructor, Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
    Member, Mt. Washington Rod & Gun Club
    National Sporting Clays Association Certified Referee

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    If you are looking for gov't officials to protect your rights, you are a fool.

    Want to call the judge: (202) 354-3300 there's his phone number.

    How many will call: zero

    Judge James E. “Jeb” Boasberg

    A Yale man ..lol
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 05-15-2014 at 03:43 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Just as well that ruling has no effect. There are multiple precedents stating unconstitutional laws are completely void and the citizen is not bound by them

    “All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” (Marbury vs.Madison, 1803.)


    “Every law consistent with the Constitution will have been made in pursuance of the powers granted by it. Every usurpation or law repugnant to it cannot have been made in pursuance of its powers. The latter will be nugatory and void.” (Thomas Jefferson, Elliot, p. 4:187-88.)

    "Where the meaning of the constitution is clear and unambiguous, there can be no resort to construction to attribute to the founders a purpose of intent not manifest in its letter." Norris v. Baltimore, 172, Md. 667; 192 A 531.0.

    "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    This ruling is obviously from a judge that interrupts the Constitution in what is called A Living Constitutional Judge. ( see The Living Constitution)
    by David A Strauss) for a better understanding.

    Police safety and public safety seemed to be held to a higher standard with these Living Constitutional Judges then the written Constitution itself.

    I would have argued that the Government as no authority to force its citizens to enter into a contract with the Government. (See Liberty of Contract) Rediscovering A Lost Constitutional Right) by David N. Mayer

    I doubt this ruling will pass on the next level.

    Requiring citizens to take a test and fill out forms and be finger printed is in essence requiring a citizen to enter into a contract.
    A contract may I add that is all one sided in favor of the Government, a contract that strips a citizen of privy etc.

    My .02

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post

    I doubt this ruling will pass on the next level.

    Requiring citizens to take a test and fill out forms and be finger printed is in essence requiring a citizen to enter into a contract.
    A contract may I add that is all one sided in favor of the Government, a contract that strips a citizen of privy etc.

    My .02

    CCJ
    I sure it will pass muster at the next level. Contract law aspect? I like it ! Screw them!

  8. #8
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    What utter CRAP indeed!

    This "Judge" has written that the DC "one-gun-a-month" restriction is fair because "the purchase of 12 guns a year should be enough for anyone..."
    Yes, there is a very upsetting finding by this liberty stealing kritocrat in black robes. You only need one or two guns to exercise the right to defend yourself in your home, so when you acquire more it is an arsenal which, according to "hiz honor" is not protected by the 2A.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    The G cannot restrict a citizen in his/her obtaining or expanding of ones property. Hence I would argue that a "gun" is property and restricting a citizen from obtaining more property is unconstitutional.

    My .02

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  10. #10
    Regular Member hhofent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    Just as well that ruling has no effect. There are multiple precedents stating unconstitutional laws are completely void and the citizen is not bound by them
    While I agree, would you want to be the poster child and open carry an automatic short barreled rifle in DC? You can use those case laws to defend yourself against the infringement provided by NFA '34 and GCA '68

    Judges in this county repeatedly ignore the constitution.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I just got done with another gun build today ! All hail commie judges !

  12. #12
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by hhofent View Post
    While I agree, would you want to be the poster child and open carry an automatic short barreled rifle in DC?
    Simple answer? Yep! You better believe I would. Of course I'm not dumb enough to do it on my own. I would make sure there was decent support to ensure it would make the local Gestapo think twice about taking action. Further to that I will say no more or I will certainly get banned.


    Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  13. #13
    Regular Member hhofent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    Simple answer? Yep! You better believe I would. Of course I'm not dumb enough to do it on my own. I would make sure there was decent support to ensure it would make the local Gestapo think twice about taking action. Further to that I will say no more or I will certainly get banned.


    Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk
    This country needs more people like you.

    Sent from an unspecified mobile phone using unspecified software.

  14. #14
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by hhofent View Post
    This country needs more people like you.
    You'd be right. One person is nothing more than a loud-mouth. We the militia need to start doing our jobs and start demanding the rights we have be honoured and respected instead of being dumb sheep making half-hearted attempts at changing things.

    Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country - John F. Kennedy
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  15. #15
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    Simple answer? Yep! You better believe I would. Of course I'm not dumb enough to do it on my own. I would make sure there was decent support to ensure it would make the local Gestapo think twice about taking action. Further to that I will say no more or I will certainly get banned.


    Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by hhofent View Post
    This country needs more people like you.

    Sent from an unspecified mobile phone using unspecified software.
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    You'd be right. One person is nothing more than a loud-mouth. We the militia need to start doing our jobs and start demanding the rights we have be honoured and respected instead of being dumb sheep making half-hearted attempts at changing things.

    Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country - John F. Kennedy
    Negative.

    Need less violence not more guys fermenting it.

    Plemy of bills have been and will continue to be passed through safe peaceful means.

    Hasn't the group in Texas shown you anything? Theres like 6 threads going right now about chipoltes. Pushing limits is a GOOD thing. But the there is a fine line between going to far and doing more damage and making more enemies then friends.

    Unless the goal is all out war and devestation, gun confiscation, etc. Etc.

    That's a crappy goal if it is.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  16. #16
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Negative.

    Need less violence not more guys fermenting it.
    mindless violence for the sake of it is just that. Mindless. One should only use it to protect themselves from harm when there is no other way

    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Plemy of bills have been and will continue to be passed through safe peaceful means.
    Of course. Like this illegal ruling. It's foolish to assume that courts will honour and respect the Constitution and in fact repeatedly have violated and broken their oath on numerous occasions and the same goes for LEOs. This forum is full of incidents of LEOs committing crimes against citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Theres like 6 threads going right now about chipoltes. Pushing limits is a GOOD thing. But the there is a fine line between going to far and doing more damage and making more enemies then friends.
    Chipotle is a non sequitur. They are a private business and if they choose to ban firearms they can just as we can respond by refusing to patronise them. I'm speaking of laws made and upheld that have no business being even considered let alone passed.

    I'm not going to deliberately set out to make enemies but when the majority of sheeple are waving the white flag it's bound to happen anyway
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    LOL Elmer FUDD; Fermenting, fermenting revolution beer is heady stuff. Now fomenting, that would be concerning.

    The Wiktionary will even identify the ****phone and pronounce it for you.
    http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/foment

    Bwahaha! What a stupid censor-bot.

    Yo! Confused liberaltarian, I am proud to have you as a soon-to-be neighbor. Was I right about the PM spam or not?
    Last edited by Nightmare; 05-20-2014 at 07:04 AM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  18. #18
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    I have no idea what you are talking about but as you mentioned Elmer Fudd perhaps kill the wabbit-ing might be a good idea.

    Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •