Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Canadian Free Press Calls Fenty-Council Plan "Law Suit Bait"

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post


    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3980

    District of Columbia’s newly proposed handgun law

    Lawsuit Bait: New D.C. Handgun LegislationBy Capital Research CenterWednesday, July 16, 2008
    By Matthew Vadum

    We may be able to measure the life of the District of Columbia’s newly proposed handgun law with a stopwatch. Unveiled today by Mayor Adrian Fenty and D.C. Council members, this measure is lawsuit bait that makes a mockery of the Supreme Court’s landmark District of Columbia v. Heller (PDF file) on June 26 by imposing maximum inconvenience on law-abiding D.C. residents who want to own firearms.

    In striking down the District’s previous handgun ban, the Court ruled that “the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.” (District of Columbia v. Heller, p. 64)

    So what does the District do? It thumbs its nose at the high court and then brags about it to appease liberal pro-gun control voters. According to a statement provided by the mayor’s office, “the handgun ban remains in effect, except for use in self-defense within the home.”

    The statement continues, asserting that the bill


    “Clarifies the safe-storage and trigger-lock requirements. The legislation modifies existing law to clarify that firearms in the home must be stored unloaded and either disassembled secured with a trigger lock, gun safe, or similar device. An exception is made for a firearm while it is being used against reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm to a person within a registered gun owner’s home. The bill also includes provisions on the transportation of firearms for legal purposes.”
    This means that a gun owner must keep his gun in an inoperable condition right up until the moment he realizes there is an actual threat. At that moment and at that moment only may he load, reassemble, unlock, or take out of a safe his gun.

    Violent criminals aren’t going to sit around and wait while residents race to load/reassemble/unlock their guns in order to comply with these onerous requirements that have the effect of preventing handguns from being used for “immediate self-defense.”

    The legislation would also impose incredible burdens on lawful would-be gun owners, forcing an owner to have his weapon subjected to ballistics testing “to determine if it is stolen or has been used in a crime.” This means the law would presume all would-be gun owners to be criminals. Clearly this is calculated to slow the gun-registration process to a crawl.

    It includes other bizarre requirements that treat potential gun owners as violent felons. Read the summary here.

    Mayor Fenty patted himself on the back at a press conference today. “We think we have struck the delicate legal balance,” he said. “While we will have lawsuits, we think we stand on solid legal ground.”

    If it passes, we’ll see how long it lasts before a judge strikes it down.


    Capital Research Center (CRC) was established in 1984 to study non-profit organizations, with a special focus on reviving the American traditions of charity, philanthropy, and voluntarism.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Maryville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    407

    Post imported post

    This new law is a joke, it seems that a lot of work remains to be done to win real freedom for the residents of the district. I see more lawsuits in the future before his highness Mayor Fenty gets the message that he can't infringe on constitutionally protected freedoms.

  3. #3
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    Hail, King Fenty. What an ASS!



    Closest color to pink I could find.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026

    Post imported post

    [devil's advocate]

    I can't help but wonder if thier 'solid legal ground' is going to be that a gun in 'storage' isn't being 'kept for immediate self defence purposes' .

    To whit: I have several side arms, not all of which are suited to a self defence scenario, ergo I keep them 'stored' (in a gun safe). However my Kimber ultra compact, my Llama 1911 clone, my Daewoo .40S&W, and my colt .380 Govt. are all kept in various locations at home in a 'ready' state for defence purposes. I would not concider these arms to be 'stored', but rather 'staged'. Ergo, I would be in compliance with their *coughbllshtcough* 'new' laws.

    [/devil's advocate]



  5. #5
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    Phssthpok wrote:
    [devil's advocate]

    I can't help but wonder if thier 'solid legal ground' is going to be that a gun in 'storage' isn't being 'kept for immediate self defence purposes' .

    To whit: I have several side arms, not all of which are suited to a self defence scenario, ergo I keep them 'stored' (in a gun safe). However my Kimber ultra compact, my Llama 1911 clone, my Daewoo .40S&W, and my colt .380 Govt. are all kept in various locations at home in a 'ready' state for defence purposes. I would not concider these arms to be 'stored', but rather 'staged'. Ergo, I would be in compliance with their *coughbllshtcough* 'new' laws.

    [/devil's advocate]

    Are they disassembled or trigger locked AND unloaded? If not, youare a criminal. Assume the position!
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    I find the OP to be a cogent analysis of the steaming pile of excrement being passed off as a SCOTUS compliant DC gun law revision. Perhaps another lawsuit against these violations will further diminish the infringement on our rights.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Maryville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    407

    Post imported post

    Phssthpok wrote:
    [devil's advocate]

    I can't help but wonder if thier 'solid legal ground' is going to be that a gun in 'storage' isn't being 'kept for immediate self defence purposes' .

    To whit: I have several side arms, not all of which are suited to a self defence scenario, ergo I keep them 'stored' (in a gun safe). However my Kimber ultra compact, my Llama 1911 clone, my Daewoo .40S&W, and my colt .380 Govt. are all kept in various locations at home in a 'ready' state for defence purposes. I would not concider these arms to be 'stored', but rather 'staged'. Ergo, I would be in compliance with their *coughbllshtcough* 'new' laws.

    [/devil's advocate]

    I think their "solid legal ground" is going to turn to quicksand in a hurry, their bulls***t new law doesn't adhere to the letter or spirit of the Supreme Court decision. I don't see how requiring a license to possess a handgun is constitutional because licensing is an exception to an otherwise illegal act, ie possession of a firearm is a felony in Massachusetts unless one has a license which the authorities don't have to give you even if you qualify for one. Plus this new law has so many restrictions as to make handgun ownership all but imposible.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705

    Post imported post

    Perhaps a multi-billion dollar class action suit against DC on behalf of disarmed victims is in order.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    Well, it seems Mr. Heller himself was denied a permit today.

    I would expect he starts the process again, he already knows what to do. The sad thing is it is people's tax money being wasted with the court process. No accountability for the the politicians. I think damages/awards/fines should be levied against them PERSONALLY and not be paid out of public coffers.

    Bet they would change their tune quick if the lawsuits were on their dime and not the public's...

Posting Permissions

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