Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: No changes to D.C. gun sales law after federal ruling in 5Cir. N.D. Texas

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,155

    No changes to D.C. gun sales law after federal ruling in 5Cir. N.D. Texas

    “As far as we understand it, with the caveat that our attorneys are still reviewing the ruling, the state of the law in the District and everywhere else in the country, except for the Northern District of Texas, stays the same,” said Robert Marus, spokesman for the D.C. Office of the Attorney General. “Right now there is really no immediate effect for the District.”
    [ ... ]
    The Virginia-based attorney who argued the case, Alan Gura, disagreed with the attorney general’s interpretation that the ruling would not affect gun purchases in the D.C. region, but conceded that the impact of the ruling may not be felt immediately. Gun dealers in the area are unlikely to alter their gun sales transactions without first receiving some sort of guidance from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Mr. Gura said.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...r-federal-rul/
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    “As far as we understand it, with the caveat that our attorneys are still reviewing the ruling, the state of the law in the District and everywhere else in the country, except for the Northern District of Texas, stays the same,” said Robert Marus, spokesman for the D.C. Office of the Attorney General. “Right now there is really no immediate effect for the District.”
    [ ... ]
    The Virginia-based attorney who argued the case, Alan Gura, disagreed with the attorney general’s interpretation that the ruling would not affect gun purchases in the D.C. region, but conceded that the impact of the ruling may not be felt immediately. Gun dealers in the area are unlikely to alter their gun sales transactions without first receiving some sort of guidance from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Mr. Gura said.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...r-federal-rul/
    The nexus of this case to DC is that the couple that sued were from DC, and the only way to get the firearm registered in DC was to go through Sykes (only gun dealer in DC) an,d pay a transfer fee of $125 per gun. Nothing has changed about the Ned to register the DC guns via the DC dealer. This was one of the points in the Lane case where both DC and Virginia were sued.

    The real impact of this ruling, if it stand, couldbe to significantly change gun shows. if interstate buying and selling is not restricted to in state buyers and sellers, then any dealer could show up at a gun show, not just the dealers from your state.
    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

  3. #3
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Private Sellers Pay Attention - Private Interstate Handgun Sales Still Illegal

    The other shoe has fallen. The judge denied the motion for a 60 day stay, and the Feds have not appealed (The BATFE and DOJ can ask for another stay for the appeal process.). This means that the feds are enjoined from enforcing the interstate transfer ban FOR INTERSTATE FFL TRANSFERS OF HANDGUNS Private buyers and sellers please note 18 USC 922(a)5 is still in effect as it was not part of the order. I am not a lawyer, but to me that means that interstate personal transfers are still illegal according to federal law.
    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

  4. #4
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    The District Court ruling only affects the plaintiffs and defendent (Holder and DOJ) for now. Once it's appealed to the 5th Circuit and a ruling is issued, then that still only applies only to the 5 CA. If that is appealed to SCOTUS and CERT is granted, then that ruling would apply nationwide.

    That's my understanding and IANAL either.
    Last edited by swinokur; 03-05-2015 at 05:30 AM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    The most important thing to remember: this ruling only applies within the U.S. Judicial District for the Northern District of Texas.

    Any interstate recipient, FFL or otherwise, would still be in violation of the law.

  6. #6
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    IANAL, but it's my understanding that this only applies to the individual plaintiffs and the defendant (DOJ) at this point. It won't apply in the entire 5th Circuit until it is appealed and a ruling is issued by the 5th Circuit.
    Last edited by swinokur; 03-10-2015 at 04:47 AM.

Posting Permissions

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