Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: The draft of the new concealed carry bill is online

  1. #1
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    463

    The draft of the new concealed carry bill is online

    The first link is to the "emergency bill" which expires in 90 days the other is to the "temporary bill" which expires in 225 days. Other than that they seem to be identical.

    For a pdf of the Emergency bill click here.
    For a pdf of the Temporary bill click here.

    Long story short it is a highly restrictive may-issue licensing scheme and it appears that people who are non-residents will have to register their "pistols" (sorry, no revolvers allowed) with the District of Columbia and in most cases satisfy their training requirements.

    P.S. Non-residents must have "a license to carry a pistol concealed upon his or her person issued by the lawful authorities of any State or subdivision of the United States" before applying for a D.C, concealed carry permit.
    Last edited by California Right To Carry; 09-19-2014 at 06:44 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Thanks.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    if it appears that the applicant has good reason to fear injury to his or her person or property or has any other
    proper reason for carrying a pistol, and that he or she is a suitable person to be so licensed.


    "any other proper reason" means what?

  4. #4
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    "Proper Reason" is just a euphemism to mean "We will find a reason to deny it".

  5. #5
    Regular Member Uber_Olafsun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    585
    Also I see the duty to notify is in there even if the cop stops someone else you are with you are supposed to notify them. Umm 5th comes to mind if I am not the one who is stopped but someone I am with is.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    if it appears that the applicant has good reason to fear injury to his or her person or property or has any other
    proper reason for carrying a pistol, and that he or she is a suitable person to be so licensed.


    "any other proper reason" means what?
    Likely cash carriers, gun dealers,exc.-although there won't be a hard definition (like if you carry over 1000 in cash) which is the hallmark of may-issue. "We know it when we see it," comes to mind.
    I am curious though how it plays with the judge considering DC's chief had this authority to issue permits before 2008 and didn't issue permits for decades, and this fact is well known. I am praying this won't require a new lawsuit, which will be another delay.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Springfield, VA
    Posts
    15
    How can the DC council ban carry on the metro? Specifically the metrorail (but metrobus is not mentioned). The WMATA board determines their policy. DC has seats on the board but so do VA and MD. It's ok to carry in VA on the metro but not MD because there is essentially no carry at all.
    Last edited by rspiess; 09-20-2014 at 10:44 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    142

    Hearing on DC Carry Bill

    A hearing has not been set on the permanent DC Carry Bill. However, it is supposed to be set for sometime in late October. We need people to come testify at this hearing on why the restrictive bill does not make sense. Persons who have been victims of violent crime and who could tell their stories would be particularly helpful as well as testimony from women and minorities. Remember this is DC. We need help from OC.org.
    Last edited by ianto94; 09-21-2014 at 05:39 AM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Kopis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    727
    why no revolvers? I thought semi autos were the DEVIL!!!??? ( i'm assuming because they dont leave shell casings and are the preferred carry weapon of a criminal?)

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    What I expected (but also feared) DC would do: Go "may issue" and then never issue, because it never hears a "good/compelling/substantial" [or insert a particular state's appropriate buzzword] reason TO issue.

    Like Hawaii has done for many years now...and gotten away with it. There's no OC in HI and it never issues CC, so there's NO LEGAL CARRY whatsoever in the "great" state of HI. Yet there's plenty of street crime.

    And that EVERYONE (rich or poor and in all 50 states) has a good/compelling/substantial reason to carry -- to protect their own LIVES -- THAT reason isn't deemed acceptable in the "may issue" states (9 of them?).

    Once again, an American citizen's Constitutional Civil Rights depends on what state he/she lives in.

    THAT clearly is UNconstitutional.

    So...another round of Federal court cases anyone?
    Last edited by cloudcroft; 09-22-2014 at 12:49 PM.
    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  11. #11
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    463
    Quote Originally Posted by cloudcroft View Post
    So...another round of Federal court cases anyone?
    Don't expect any of the so called gun-rights groups to bring an Open Carry lawsuit.

  12. #12
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    463

    The DC may-issue bill passes unanimously

    From two hours ago on my Facebook California Right To Carry page:

    The "License to Carry a Pistol Emergency Amendment Act of 2014" (as amended) has passed. I do not know what the amendments are as I tuned in late. The bill passed unanimously and so I suspect the same amendments will be incorporated into the "License to Carry a Pistol Temporary Amendment Act of 2014" and passed unanimously as well.

  13. #13
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    Likely cash carriers, gun dealers,exc.-although there won't be a hard definition (like if you carry over 1000 in cash) which is the hallmark of may-issue. "We know it when we see it," comes to mind.
    I am curious though how it plays with the judge considering DC's chief had this authority to issue permits before 2008 and didn't issue permits for decades, and this fact is well known. I am praying this won't require a new lawsuit, which will be another delay.
    Why? This is a draft of a law that certainly doesnt satisfy the requirements of the Second Amendment. I would suggest continual litigation until D.C decides to behave. Otherwise they'll think the citizens accept this. How long was California 'may issue' and how long was there a ban on firearms within Chicago? Hit DC hard and hit them fast. While many don't have the money for this their are some who do and should be pursuing this as far as it goes.
    "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
  •