Revolvers Only Please

echo6tango · Jun 28, 2008

imported post

Watching news reports and reading articles online, I have heard the D.C. Mayor, the MPDP chief of police, and their interim Attorney General stating and being quoted as saying that automatic and semi-automatic handguns CANNOT be registered (still banned). I merely assumed that they were misspeaking, confusing the term “semi-automatic” as I’ve heard so many times before. But then, I start reading on the MPDP website Q&A for handgun registrations:

Are there restrictions on what kinds of handguns residents will be able to register and possess?

Yes, under District law that the Supreme Court did not disturb, automatic and semi-automatic handguns generally may not be registered. Revolvers in the home will be legal[/b] and, as before, residents remain free to register most shotguns and rifles. Those with questions about specific firearms should contact the Firearms Registration Section of the Metropolitan Police Department at (202) 727-9490.

http://mpdc.dc.gov/mpdc/cwp/view,a,1237,q,565463.asp

And of course of favorite of OC’ers:

What other restrictions will there be on handguns?

The new rules will allow handgun possession in the home only[/b], and only by those who properly register their handguns with the Metropolitan Police Department. The Supreme Court has not altered the legality of carrying handguns outside the home.
[you can only speak your opinion in your home? You can only pray whileinside your home? You can only petition the Government while inside your home? You can only be free from illegal search and seizure while inside your home? You're only protected from cruel and unusual punishment while in your home? - All rhetorical questions of course]

I’m sure whatever regulations the MPDP come up with in the end will be scrutinized, picked apart, and I would expect plenty more discussion and possibly lawsuits until every letter of every word in the SCOTUS decision is followed.

This is not over and done by a long shot. I wouldn’t expect OC by civilians any time soon in D.C., but I would expect the regulation of revolvers only to come into play soon enough.

Rights piece-mealed, a little bit at a time...I'm sure that's what the Founding Fathers intended.

timf343 · Jun 28, 2008

imported post

Some argue that we, as a country, have more important things to worry about than guns and rights.

Several months ago:

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration and the Bush administration and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," Obama said.

I AGREE!

But in a very different way. They're not clinging to "guns or religion" because they do not care about the other problems we face. They're doing so, because unless we can have confidence that our fundamental, basic, natural rights are not up for debate, how are we possibly expected to resolve far more complicated issues?!

If your 1 bedroom house needs to be expanded to make room for your new baby, you may need that extra bedroom, but you have to FIRST fix your cracked foundation. If not, and it may take years, that extra bedroom will eventually crumble with the rest of your home.

Tim

Revolvers Only Please

echo6tango

Regular Member

timf343

Campaign Veteran