Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 54

Thread: Federal judge rules DC ban on gun carry rights unconstitutional

  1. #1
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,991

    Talking Federal judge rules DC ban on gun carry rights unconstitutional

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...onstitutional/
    "A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Saturday overturned the city’s total ban on residents being allowing to carry firearms outside their home in a landmark decision for gun-rights activists.

    Judge Frederick Scullin Jr. wrote in his ruling in Palmer v. District of Columbia that the right to bear arms extends outside the home, therefore gun-control laws in the nation’s capital are “unconstitutional.”"

    Big win!
    "The beauty of the Second Amenment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson
    "Evil often triumphs, but never conquers." Joseph Roux
    http://nwfood.shelfreliance.com

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Arsenal Attorneys weigh in at http://tinyurl.com/ktdyar6

    And the actul ruling itself at http://tinyurl.com/lgr27yw

    Everybody seems to be celebrating that at least for the rest of tonight DC is a wide open Constitutional Carry town. I'm not so sure.

    I see a decent argument for seeing the licensing scheme, and thus the restriction against unlicensed handguns, as still being in effect. In other words, 1) if you already have a DC possession permit you can carry outside your home/business, and 2) that DC is going to have to either start issuing permits to non-residents withing the same scheme that already exists, or come up with some other permitting scheme for non-residents that will allow them to carry.

    What really bears watching is how this ruling will impact other states that do not have a licensing/permitting system for non-residents. If it holds, as I believe it will, I may begin considering a trip to upstate New York.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  3. #3
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    463

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post

    Everybody seems to be celebrating that at least for the rest of tonight DC is a wide open Constitutional Carry town. I'm not so sure.

    I see a decent argument for seeing the licensing scheme, and thus the restriction against unlicensed handguns, as still being in effect.
    Nothing in the court order is open to such an interpretation. D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) are permanently enjoined.

    Unless and until a stay is issued or D.C., amends its code the order of the court means exactly what it says, nothing more and nothing less.


    “ORDER that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this Memorandum-Decision and Order, are permanently enjoined from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) to ban registration of handguns to be carried in public for self-defense by law-abiding citizens; and the Court further ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this Memorandum-Decision and Order are permanently enjoined from enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a); and the Court further ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation from them who receive actual notice of this Memorandum-Decision and Order from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) against individuals based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District of Columbia. IT IS SO ORDERED.”

    District of Columbia Code section § 22-4504(a) states:


    22-4504(a) No person shall carry within the District of Columbia either openly or concealed on or about their person, a pistol, or any deadly or dangerous weapon capable of being so concealed. Whoever violates this section shall be punished as provided in § 22-4515, except that:

    (1) A person who violates this section by carrying a pistol, or any deadly or dangerous weapon, in a place other than the person’s dwelling place, place of business, or on other land possessed by the person, shall be fined not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both; or

    (2) If the violation of this section occurs after a person has been convicted in the District of Columbia of a violation of this section or of a felony, either in the District of Columbia or another jurisdiction, the person shall be fined not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

    (a-1) Except as otherwise permitted by law, no person shall carry within the District of Columbia a rifle or shotgun. A person who violates this subsection shall be subject to the criminal penalties set forth in subsection (a)(1) and (2) of this section.


    D.C. Code § 7-2502.02 states:


    (a) A registration certificate shall not be issued for a:

    (1) Sawed-off shotgun;

    (2) Machine gun;

    (3) Short-barreled rifle;

    (4) Pistol not validly registered to the current registrant in the District prior to September 24, 1976, except that the prohibition on registering a pistol shall not apply to:

    (A) Any organization that employs at least one commissioned special police officer or other employee licensed to carry a firearm and that arms the employee with a firearm during the employee’s duty hours;

    (B) A police officer who has retired from the Metropolitan Police Department;

    (C) Any person who seeks to register a pistol for use in self-defense within that person’s home; or

    (D) A firearms instructor, or an organization that employs a firearms instructor, for the purpose of conducting firearms training.

    (5) An unsafe firearm prohibited under § 7-2505.04;

    (6) An assault weapon; or

    (7) A .50 BMG rifle.

    (b) Repealed.

    Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry
    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    The way I read the opinion, it is a death blow to permitting...even if not read saying that permitting schemes are dead.

    Why? Because it requires them to allow anyone to carry - even people out of their jurisdiction.

    And people have a right to travel, and people do visit DC, sometimes at a moments notice. So DC would have to have in place a permit scheme that allows almost instant permitting. That's just not going to happen. And it would be difficult to have one permit scheme for outsiders and another for residents of the jurisdiction - 14th equal protection issues. As I said before on the forum, if they want a permit scheme it must be almost a drive-through procedure.

    Just one point (and would apply to all states too).

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northwest Kent County, Michigan
    Posts
    757
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    The way I read the opinion, it is a death blow to permitting...even if not read saying that permitting schemes are dead.

    Why? Because it requires them to allow anyone to carry - even people out of their jurisdiction.

    And people have a right to travel, and people do visit DC, sometimes at a moments notice. So DC would have to have in place a permit scheme that allows almost instant permitting. That's just not going to happen. And it would be difficult to have one permit scheme for outsiders and another for residents of the jurisdiction - 14th equal protection issues. As I said before on the forum, if they want a permit scheme it must be almost a drive-through procedure.

    Just one point (and would apply to all states too).
    I see David McBeth's point as valid, however, I think D.C. will push the envelope on obstructions (permitting fees, waiting periods, red tape, etc.) and it will take further slap-downs after additional litigation to see David's vision finally realized.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,159
    Quote Originally Posted by OC4me View Post
    I see David McBeth's point as valid, however, I think D.C. will push the envelope on obstructions (permitting fees, waiting periods, red tape, etc.) and it will take further slap-downs after additional litigation to see David's vision finally realized.
    It will take a consent decree; short of Congress reasserting sovereignty over its 'hood.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Lasjayhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    294
    Sounds like the DC police chief is taking the ruling to heart:

    From Emily Miller's Twitter feed.

    Emily Miller ‏@EmilyMiller 1h

    STUNNING DEVELOPMENT: DC Police Chief Lanier just told force not to arrest a person who can legally carry a gun in DC or any state.

    Emily Miller ‏@EmilyMiller 1h

    More -- DC police chief using guidance from AG -- grants full reciprocity for all open and concealed carry from others states.

    Emily Miller ‏@EmilyMiller 44m

    Only gun arrests now in DC can be DC residents with unregistered guns and non-residents who are prohibited under federal laws.
    I stopped stocking for the zombie apocalypse. I now stock for the liberal apocalypse.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    Nonsense!
    I agree ! The notion that the gov't can even require a permit is nonsense.

    Have you gone open carrying handing out your stickers since the new court decision?

  9. #9
    Regular Member Grim_Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by Lasjayhawk View Post
    Sounds like the DC police chief is taking the ruling to heart:

    From Emily Miller's Twitter feed.

    Emily Miller ‏@EmilyMiller 1h

    STUNNING DEVELOPMENT: DC Police Chief Lanier just told force not to arrest a person who can legally carry a gun in DC or any state.

    Emily Miller ‏@EmilyMiller 1h

    More -- DC police chief using guidance from AG -- grants full reciprocity for all open and concealed carry from others states.

    Emily Miller ‏@EmilyMiller 44m

    Only gun arrests now in DC can be DC residents with unregistered guns and non-residents who are prohibited under federal laws.
    Hot Damn! I guess this means that the federal judges decision will be a hammer blow to all states that don't allow non residents to KABA outside the home. This should also help out the the defense case of the Pennsylvania lady that was arrested in New Jersey who was arrested for lawfully possessing a firearm discussed in another thread. Should lead to a major constitutional defense.
    Last edited by Grim_Night; 07-28-2014 at 08:31 AM.
    Armed and annoyingly well informed!

    There are two constants when dealing with liberals:
    1) Liberals never quit until they are satisfied.
    2) Liberals are never satisfied.

  10. #10
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    DC is a federal enclave. How this decision can be applied to the several states is a different question.

    http://nypost.com/2012/01/16/the-str...-nys-gun-laws/
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  11. #11
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    i've been going over some of the DC laws on guns...and apparently, it is lawful for an 18 year old to obtain a "registration certificate" with consent of a parent or guardian. does this mean it's 18 and up constitutional carry in DC?

  12. #12
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    oh-

    and what about the 4th Circuit ruling US vs Black?

    open carry, where not prohibited, is not probable cause.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    northern wis
    Posts
    3,201
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    i've been going over some of the DC laws on guns...and apparently, it is lawful for an 18 year old to obtain a "registration certificate" with consent of a parent or guardian. does this mean it's 18 and up constitutional carry in DC?

    Only if your not a DC resident
    Personal Defensive Solutions professional personal firearms, edge weapons and hands on defensive training and tactics pdsolutions@hotmail.com

    Any and all spelling errors are just to give the spelling Nazis something to do

  14. #14
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    A memorandum was sent to DC officers over the weekend informing them that they can no longer arrest someone for carrying a handgunif: the person is a DC resident and his handgun and ammunition are registered with the DC police or, the person is a resident of a state where he has been issued a permit to carry a concealed handgun or in the case of open carry, the person is either permitted to carry in this manner or the state allows this carry method by default.*

    While all of this may indeed be factual, I don't think I would want to be the test case to find out how the police would treat me when they discovered I was armed. But that's not an issue for me since I have no reason nor desire to cross the river into DC.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...onstitutional/


    *Source: Radio interview with a DC police officer heard this morning.
    Last edited by SouthernBoy; 07-28-2014 at 04:32 PM.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  15. #15
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    So why aren't we setting up a large gathering?

    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 SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    So why aren't we setting up a large gathering?

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    For what and why... and where?

    As I write this, I could go down to Washington, DC with my openly carried handgun holstered on my hip and walk around most parts of DC without fear of getting arrested (technically). I would imagine if I did, I would be stopped a number of times and be asked to present an ID to confirm the state in which I reside. Of course in Virginia, open carry is the normal mode of carrying a sidearm (read that as standard or default) so no permit is required to OC.

    This is a HUGE step forward and I would bet money that robberies, burglaries, molestations, and other attacks by BG's is going to decline significantly over the next month should this court decision remain in force.
    Last edited by SouthernBoy; 07-28-2014 at 04:37 PM.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  17. #17
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    463

    Gura agrees to a 90 day stay of the Palmer decision

    The DC Handgun Carry Decision – Throwing Victory into the Jaws of Defeat
    California Right To Carry July 28, 2014
    For Immediate Release: Redondo Beach California

    On Saturday, July 26th Senior U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr issued a court order permanently enjoining the enforcement of a District of Columbia law criminalizing the carrying of a handgun in public regardless of whether the handgun is carried openly or concealed. As a result of Judge Scullin's decision it is currently legal for nonresidents to carry a handgun openly or concealed in the District just as it was when the Second Amendment was enacted in 1791.


    Judge Scullin also barred the District from enforcing its resident registration requirement which prohibited DC residents from carrying their registered handguns in public for the purpose of self-defense.


    The lawsuit, Palmer v. District of Columbia is funded by the Second Amendment Foundation. Unfortunately, the lawyer for Palmer (Alan Gura) and the head of the SAF (Alan Gottlieb) oppose Open Carry of both handguns and long guns. Furthermore, the two Alans want it to be a criminal offense to carry a handgun concealed unless one has a government issued concealed carry permit. The lead plaintiff, Palmer, is himself a vocal opponent of the right to openly carry firearms in public.


    And so today, July 28th, the District of Columbia filed a motion to stay the Palmer decision to which Alan Gura did not object to a 90 day stay in order to give the District time to write a new law banning the Open Carry of handguns and requiring a permit for concealed carry. It was unclear whether or not the court order applied to long guns as well. The District has since taken the position that the carrying of long guns in public for the purpose of self-defense is still illegal.


    Something very similar happened in Illinois where the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an injunction against that state's ban on carrying loaded firearms (including long guns) in public. The court issued a stay on its own accord and for the next seven months both the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) lobbied the Illinois legislature to enact a new law banning firearms from being openly carried and lobbied for a new law which would make it a criminal offense to carry a handgun concealed without the bearer possessing a burdensome, expensive concealed carry permit.


    Judge Scullin can and should deny the stay.


    Furthermore, the mainstream press should stop hiding the fact that the two largest gun control organizations in the United States are the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation. What more proof does the press need?


    Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry
    ###

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    74
    Just an interesting side note, Tom Palmer, the plaintiff was also originally a plaintiff in Heller and is a scholar at CATO Institute.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    For what and why... and where?

    As I write this, I could go down to Washington, DC with my openly carried handgun holstered on my hip and walk around most parts of DC without fear of getting arrested (technically). I would imagine if I did, I would be stopped a number of times and be asked to present an ID to confirm the state in which I reside. Of course in Virginia, open carry is the normal mode of carrying a sidearm (read that as standard or default) so no permit is required to OC.

    This is a HUGE step forward and I would bet money that robberies, burglaries, molestations, and other attacks by BG's is going to decline significantly over the next month should this court decision remain in force.
    I figured since this is a huge landmark victory it'd he cause to celebrate. A gathering from guys local to the area.

    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

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321
    there have already been a few people open carrying in DC
    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/first-...c-in-70-years/

    i personally know someone who open carried at the lincoln memorial. he was stopped and questioned. they ran his ID and let him go on about his business.
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    74
    The divergent application between residents and non-residents allows the police to subject all open carryers to being stopped.

  22. #22
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by smellslikemichigan View Post
    there have already been a few people open carrying in DC
    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/first-...c-in-70-years/

    i personally know someone who open carried at the lincoln memorial. he was stopped and questioned. they ran his ID and let him go on about his business.
    +1 Thanks for the links.!
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  23. #23
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    Here is a partial copy of Chief Lanier's order. Note the third paragraph. If you can legally possess in your home state (not prohibited) you may carry your firearm and ammo.

    Also note DC is in the DC Circuit and 4CA rulings are not binding on DC.

  24. #24
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by smellslikemichigan View Post
    there have already been a few people open carrying in DC
    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/first-...c-in-70-years/

    i personally know someone who open carried at the lincoln memorial. he was stopped and questioned. they ran his ID and let him go on about his business.
    Never thought I would see the day. Thank you Emily Miller, if even for just a scant moment in time. Should be interesting to see how this pans out.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  25. #25
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    I figured since this is a huge landmark victory it'd he cause to celebrate. A gathering from guys local to the area.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    Drive on down and join the party. Folks would love to have ya. Heck, you're a cop and are on the in.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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