Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: DC's Gun Ban is now back in place

  1. #1
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    DC's Gun Ban is now back in place

    Despite recent victories in the Supreme Court, it is once again impossible for DC residents to legally purchase a handgun.

    Shot down: D.C. residents unable to register handguns


    WASHINGTON - Nearly three years after the United States Supreme Court overturned the D.C. ban on handguns, residents of the District can no longer register guns in the city.

    A temporary, de facto ban is in place because the one man who could facilitate handgun ownership in the nation's capital has stopped taking registration orders.

    Since the lifting of the handgun ban in June 2008, Charles Sykes has processed more than 1,000 handguns for District residents. Sykes tells WTOP he's stopped taking orders for now.

    [...] See link for rest of article.

    TFred

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    The solution is simple. Take the responsibility for gun law away from DC. The Congress should pass a law that immediately repeals any and all laws in DC regarding guns and bars the use of any other DC law to, in any way, to restrict the right to carry. The repeal would include any laws that impede the operation of FFL license holders from operating a retail outlet in DC.

    The giant whooshing sound would be the influx of legally-owned firearms and dealers rushing to fill the void. There would be a large amount of gunfire for a while, then the final sound would be the crime rate rocketing earthward.

    The downside would be all the criminals moving their operations to Maryland. The criminals with really low IQs would try to operate in Virginia, thereby adding to the decrease in surplus population of dumb crooks.

  3. #3
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    A fellow shooter on the Maryland Shooters Forum spoke to the single DC FFL yesterday and he stated he will be up and running in a new location shortly. I have no way of confirming any of this so take it for what it's worth.

    Certainly a problem that needs fixing. Is DC guilty of restricting free trade? Looks that way to me. The Feds love using the commerce clause to put their noses into many other gun related laws. Maybe some relief from DC's ridiculous gun laws is warranted. I also heard GURA and the SAF are looking closely at this mess. Maybe a lawsuit is forthcoming.

  4. #4
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506
    Knock em dead guys !!!! how about introduce a bill that will remove the FFL requirement. Its a worthless requirement

  5. #5
    Regular Member Orion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    108
    Sorry for my ignorance as I am not familiar with DC laws, but if it is required that all firearms get processed through a FFL is there some restriction in play that prevents another interested party from getting a FFL and taking over the processing from Sykes?

  6. #6
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    Sorry for my ignorance as I am not familiar with DC laws, but if it is required that all firearms get processed through a FFL is there some restriction in play that prevents another interested party from getting a FFL and taking over the processing from Sykes?
    No.

    Sykes is opening again shortly according to some folks

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    eye95:

    There is Federal Legislation that would Preempt Firearm-related Regulation to The United States Federal Congress, to The Exclusion of The District of Columbia, except for Open Carry and Public Building Carry.

    The Link is Available here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...ativeData.php|

    aadvark

  8. #8
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290
    Mr. Sykes is going to play Hell getting a new location. D.C. is pulling the same stunt other communities have used to effectively ban "adult" bookstores: Zoning them out of business.

    The idea that taking the so-called "ballistic fingerprint" of a firearm (guns gots fingers??) will aid in the identification of a "crime gun" is bogus. With regular firing and cleaning, the characteristics of a firearm wll change, and the barrel striations, firing pin, and ejector/extractor marks will also alter. Not to mention that a rattail file and some crocus cloth can be used to accomplish the same thing deliberately. So there's at least ONE part of the DC requirements for registraation that can be shown plainly to be useless save for as an obstacle to gun ownership.

    Congress made one huge mistake when it permitted "home rule" in the District. The entire government (except maybe the cops and the fire department) is one huge cavalcade of clowns and poltroons, operating out of incredibly crummy facilities. Even the DC flag is the homliest banner I have ever seen. Congress should rip away home rule and install the original three ccommissioners form of management. If the residents don't like it, there's no wall keeping them in (but thank God there's the Potomac River.)

  9. #9
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    I can't find a link to the interview, but WTOP had their "Ask the Chief" segment this morning, and this subject came up. DC Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said that the MPD and ATF were working real hard to help the one FFL get back in business. She said she thought it may be as early as next week. I guess we'll see.

    She also made reference to an emergency ordinance that was recently passed by the DC City Council that waived the 10 day waiting period due to this problem.

    On a good note, according to the interviewer, there were many questions posed about this, so the interest is definitely there.

    TFred

  10. #10
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I can't find a link to the interview, but WTOP had their "Ask the Chief" segment this morning, and this subject came up. DC Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said that the MPD and ATF were working real hard to help the one FFL get back in business. She said she thought it may be as early as next week. I guess we'll see.

    She also made reference to an emergency ordinance that was recently passed by the DC City Council that waived the 10 day waiting period due to this problem.

    On a good note, according to the interviewer, there were many questions posed about this, so the interest is definitely there.

    TFred
    They're running scared. They know Congress is ready to step on their little domain of "only we know the laws and we're not telling." Blocking a lawful business is restraint of free trade. Onerous and immoral are regulations that prohibit strip joints, dirty book stores, etc, in most municipal codes. Boston used them to close the Combat Zone years ago and they stood up on moral turpitude statutes. The 2A says a lawful business with an FFL is neither. Eventually, Chicago will have gun shops, as well. Scum like daley, emmanuel, et al even admit the handwriting is on the wall. Remember this about the pos chief of police: she has done everything she can to invalidate the rights of DC residents in respect of the 2A. I bet she's "working real hard."

  11. #11
    Regular Member TrailRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Winston Salem
    Posts
    83
    The OP post is misleading towards the actual content of the article. This isn't a case of some bureaucrat not wanting to process permits to create a de facto gun ban; if there's only one person capable of handling FFL transfers in D.C., it makes sense that he won't be able to process new orders when his business is in the process of moving to a new space. The only thing that the actual government of D.C. seems involved with is a strict zoning requirement for where an FFL business can be located.

    Also misleading: More than one person in D.C. seems to be capable of handling FFL transfers. See page 2 of same article.

    One potential solution is for the government of D.C. to *gasp* work with the Sykes and Sheppard and help them find appropriate locations under current zoning code, or or by loosening the zoning code to give them more outlet options.
    "There are two spiritual dangers in not owning a farm. One is the danger of supposing that breakfast comes from the grocery, and the other that heat comes from the furnace." ~ Aldo Leopold

    Trailrunner's Blog
    Got Twitter?

  12. #12
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290
    .

    One potential solution is for the government of D.C. to *gasp* work with the Sykes and Sheppard and help them find appropriate locations under current zoning code, or or by loosening the zoning code to give them more outlet options.[/QUOTE]

    The D.C. government isn't interested in working with anyone to re-establish a means for D.C. residents to excersise even the watered-down version of 2A rights they were "granted" by the recent SCOTUS ruling. The D.C. government to a man and woman is hell bent on throwing whatever roadblocks they can gin up to PREVENT law abiding citizens from defending themselves.

    Gasp, indeed.

  13. #13
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by TrailRunner View Post
    The OP post is misleading towards the actual content of the article. This isn't a case of some bureaucrat not wanting to process permits to create a de facto gun ban; if there's only one person capable of handling FFL transfers in D.C., it makes sense that he won't be able to process new orders when his business is in the process of moving to a new space. The only thing that the actual government of D.C. seems involved with is a strict zoning requirement for where an FFL business can be located.

    Also misleading: More than one person in D.C. seems to be capable of handling FFL transfers. See page 2 of same article.

    One potential solution is for the government of D.C. to *gasp* work with the Sykes and Sheppard and help them find appropriate locations under current zoning code, or or by loosening the zoning code to give them more outlet options.
    From the article:

    Zoning regulations require gun dealers to locate in either a commercial zone or industrial zone. Most of the District is either zoned for residential use or is federal land. There is also the added restriction of dealers not being able to open a shop within 300 feet of any home, church, school, library or playground.

    That would seem to unreasonably restrict such a location for a FFL to "set up shop".

    With all due respect, maybe you need to review the definition of "de facto". If conditions conspire, either intentionally or unintentionally, to prevent a resident from obtaining their gun, then indeed, a "de facto gun ban" is back in place. "De facto" is about results, not intent.

    There is no legitimate reason to restrict a transfer FFL to any type of zoning whatsoever. One could minimally get by with a delivery address (mail and common carrier), one extra parking space (make appointments for your transferees to come one at a time) a small table to fill out forms, and about 9 square feet of floor space for a good gun safe.

    All the rest is red tape, designed to inhibit the rights of these citizens.

    TFred

  14. #14
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290
    Zoning FFLs out of a "churches, schools' etc "exclusion zone" serves NO purpose whatsoeve, save to insinuate that firearms dealerships attract "unsavory characters", or to convince extremely dopey people that having a secure stockpile of firearms located near innocents is dangerous because one could "go off" all by itself or some other crap.

    By that logic, armored car deliveries should be similarly restricted. Armored car robberies almost always involve the discharge of live ammo, and there are far, far more instances of those than of violent incidents at gun stores. Anyone who has ever been in a gun shop who has one brain cell would realize that an attempt at violence there would be suicide.

    The late D.C. City councilman David Clarke (who rode his bike downhill from his upper 16th Street home for the benefit of the cameras and stuffed it in a cab for the uphill journey home) once held an event after a gun buy-back where he, with a crazed expression on his face, used a mini-sledge to pound on the firearms obtained by the program.

    That's the kind of freaking idiots you poor souls in D.C. are up against. If you think they can be reasoned with, I got a nother think for you. Sorry, but that's the way it is across the Moat.

  15. #15
    Regular Member TrailRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Winston Salem
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    From the article:

    Zoning regulations require gun dealers to locate in either a commercial zone or industrial zone. Most of the District is either zoned for residential use or is federal land. There is also the added restriction of dealers not being able to open a shop within 300 feet of any home, church, school, library or playground.

    That would seem to unreasonably restrict such a location for a FFL to "set up shop".

    With all due respect, maybe you need to review the definition of "de facto". If conditions conspire, either intentionally or unintentionally, to prevent a resident from obtaining their gun, then indeed, a "de facto gun ban" is back in place. "De facto" is about results, not intent.

    There is no legitimate reason to restrict a transfer FFL to any type of zoning whatsoever. One could minimally get by with a delivery address (mail and common carrier), one extra parking space (make appointments for your transferees to come one at a time) a small table to fill out forms, and about 9 square feet of floor space for a good gun safe.

    All the rest is red tape, designed to inhibit the rights of these citizens.

    TFred
    You have an agenda, and that's okay. If you want to make a case that DC should remove all restrictions on the zoning and remove any restrictions on firearms then that's fine. Hell, I agree with you. But you need to chill out, and lay off of the ad hominem attacks (you insinuated that I lack intelligence because I use words you *think* I don't understand).

    I never said that it wasn't a de facto gun ban, I said that "This isn't a case of some bureaucrat not wanting to process permits to create a de facto gun ban". The OP's post and the title of this thread insinuate that the government of DC is conspiring to defy the Supreme Court and continue with the gun ban via the one person that "processes handguns" not taking any more orders. This is misleading, and that's the point I was making.

    I also never made any statement to the effect of zoning requirements being reasonable or that it was legitimate to restrict FFL's via zoning requirements. I actually stated that the zoning requirements were strict and that I thought the government of DC should either help Sykes find a new lease or loosen the zoning regs to give him more options.

    You also put "set up shop" in quotation marks. That phrase is not included in either the article or in my post. If you are attributing that phrase to me, I'd prefer it if you would refrain from putting words in my mouth.

    Cheers.
    "There are two spiritual dangers in not owning a farm. One is the danger of supposing that breakfast comes from the grocery, and the other that heat comes from the furnace." ~ Aldo Leopold

    Trailrunner's Blog
    Got Twitter?

  16. #16
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984

    press release from SAF:




    SAF CHALLENGES INTERSTATE HANDGUN SALES BAN


    BELLEVUE, WA - The Second Amendment Foundation today filed suit in U.S. District Court in Virginia challenging the constitutionality of federal and Virginia provisions barring handgun sales to non-residents.

    SAF is joined in the lawsuit by Michelle Lane, a District of Columbia resident who cannot legally purchase handguns because there are no retail firearms dealers inside the District. The Supreme Court's 2008 Heller ruling struck down the District's handgun ban, confirming that individuals have a constitutional right to possess handguns

    SAF and Lane are represented by attorney Alan Gura of Gura & Possessky, PLLC, who won both the Heller ruling and last year's Supreme Court victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago. Named as defendants are Attorney General Eric Holder and W. Steven Flaherty, superintendent of the Virginia State Police.

    "This is an important issue in the era of the national instant background check," said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "The NICS check should allow law-abiding citizens like Miss Lane to exercise their Second Amendment rights regardless their place of residence."


    "Americans don't check their constitutional rights at the state line," said Gura. "And since Michelle Lane is legally entitled to possess firearms, forcing her to seek a non-existing D.C. dealer to buy a handgun is pointless when perfectly legitimate options exist minutes across the Potomac River."

    "The Supreme Court has ruled that District residents have an individual right, protected by the Constitution, to have a handgun in their home," Gottlieb noted. "The high court has also ruled that the Second Amendment applies to the states. Existing state and federal statutes violate both the spirit and letter of recent court rulings and the Constitution, and our lawsuit seeks to remedy that situation"..

    The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.



    < Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family > Copyright © 2010 Second Amendment Foundation, All Rights Reserved.
    Second Amendment Foundation
    James Madison Building
    12500 N.E. Tenth Place
    Bellevue, WA 98005 Voice: 425-454-7012
    Toll Free: 800-426-4302
    FAX: 425-451-3959
    email: InformationRequest@saf.org
    Last edited by swinokur; 05-10-2011 at 08:23 PM.

  17. #17
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984

  18. #18
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by TrailRunner View Post
    You have an agenda, and that's okay. If you want to make a case that DC should remove all restrictions on the zoning and remove any restrictions on firearms then that's fine. Hell, I agree with you. But you need to chill out, and lay off of the ad hominem attacks (you insinuated that I lack intelligence because I use words you *think* I don't understand).

    I never said that it wasn't a de facto gun ban, I said that "This isn't a case of some bureaucrat not wanting to process permits to create a de facto gun ban". The OP's post and the title of this thread insinuate that the government of DC is conspiring to defy the Supreme Court and continue with the gun ban via the one person that "processes handguns" not taking any more orders. This is misleading, and that's the point I was making.

    I also never made any statement to the effect of zoning requirements being reasonable or that it was legitimate to restrict FFL's via zoning requirements. I actually stated that the zoning requirements were strict and that I thought the government of DC should either help Sykes find a new lease or loosen the zoning regs to give him more options.

    You also put "set up shop" in quotation marks. That phrase is not included in either the article or in my post. If you are attributing that phrase to me, I'd prefer it if you would refrain from putting words in my mouth.

    Cheers.
    Apparently Alan Gura thinks the ban is back, and with all due respect, I'll take his word over yours any day.

    But seriously...

    I did not attack you personally. I merely suggested that you are misusing the phrase "de facto". In my understanding, de facto, which can be literally translated as "in fact" among other things, has more of an unintentional, or secondary nature to it, rather than intentional, or something that someone sets out to do specifically.

    It would not make any sense for the DC Government to set up a "de facto" ban, unless they were trying to cleverly subvert the law, which I suppose many may believe is their intent.

    I would also suggest that the DC Government does indeed intentionally make it as hard as they legally can to get a gun. I don't have a cite, but I believe that some city council members have been quoted in the press saying essentially that very thing.

    When you build a Rube Goldberg process for getting a gun that is intentionally cumbersome, and one of a hundred parts fails thus causing the failure of the whole process, then yes, I say that is an intentional roadblock to keep citizens who happen to live in DC from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

    I quoted you in the quote blocks. I used quote marks around "set up shop" simply because it is a metaphoric phrase. I really can't help it if you are offended by my writing style.

    You don't have to agree with me. I find the evidence to support my position overwhelming. Do not personally attack me for it. Everything I've posted is well thought-out and backed up with support, as needed.

    V/R,

    TFred

  19. #19
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by TrailRunner View Post
    But you need to chill out, and lay off of the ad hominem attacks (you insinuated that I lack intelligence because I use words you *think* I don't understand).
    And by the way, I insinuated no such thing. You may have inferred it, but to claim that I "insinuated" ascribes motive, and that's not possible. No person can know the true motives of another, certainly not through a 3 or 4 paragraph forum post.

    You can infer anything you want from any writing, that is beyond the control of the author. But it does say quite a bit about the reader.

    TFred

  20. #20
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    My guess is that this case will be tossed, because Ms. Lane will be judged as not having "standing" because there is at least 1 other Class 01 FFL in DC, who currently holds a valid "dealer" FFL...

    Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center could legally (but refuses to) facilitate her transfer. He currently holds a valid Class 01 FFL and can do transfers under DCs and Federal laws. Sugarmann has held his Class 01 FFL since 1996.

    Josh Sugarmann
    Violence Policy Center
    1730 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
    Suite 1014
    Washington, DC 20036

    Phone: (202) 822-8200
    url: www.vpc.org

    Sugarmann's complete FFL number is Number 1-54-000-01-8C-00725

    Just sayin'...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  21. #21
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lebanon, VA
    Posts
    676
    Obviously, the question of standing was one of the reasons why this was filed in E.D.Va. and not D.D.C. and thus Ms. Lane and SAF will hopefully avoid the DC Circuit's absurd standing rules.
    James M. "Jim" Mullins, Jr., Esq.
    Admitted to practice in West Virginia and Florida.

    Founder, Past President, Treasurer, and General Counsel, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
    Life Member, NRA

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    My guess is that this case will be tossed, because Ms. Lane will be judged as not having "standing" because there is at least 1 other Class 01 FFL in DC, who currently holds a valid "dealer" FFL...

    Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center could legally (but refuses to) facilitate her transfer. He currently holds a valid Class 01 FFL and can do transfers under DCs and Federal laws. Sugarmann has held his Class 01 FFL since 1996.

    Josh Sugarmann
    Violence Policy Center
    1730 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
    Suite 1014
    Washington, DC 20036

    Phone: (202) 822-8200
    url: www.vpc.org

    Sugarmann's complete FFL number is Number 1-54-000-01-8C-00725

    Just sayin'...
    Any reason this guy has an FFL working for the VPC?

  23. #23
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    Any reason this guy has an FFL working for the VPC?

    Josh Sugarmann doesn't just work FOR the VPC--he pretty much IS the VPC--He's been the president and primary mouthpiece for them for years....

    Maybe he does transfers for other hypocritical sociopaths like Ted Kennedy, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Mikulski, Jane Fonda, and Carl Rowan...

    However, considering that the address on his FFL is NOT zoned under DC law for "firearms sales", or for ANY sort of retail business, his applications to the BATFE for the last few decades are fraudulent, and therefore felonious, because to get a Class-01 FFL, you have to attest on your application that the address listed on the app is zoned for such a business.
    Last edited by Dreamer; 05-15-2011 at 10:24 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  24. #24
    Regular Member Washintonian_For_Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Mercer Island, Washington, USA
    Posts
    922
    When government becomes despotic, it is time to ignore government.

    When government uses force, coercion and violence against its people... it is time for its people to respond in kind.

    Authoritarians only understand one thing... raw force.

    If the people don't stand up and forcefully resist... they deserve their enslavement.
    Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company. ~ George Washington

  25. #25
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Washintonian_For_Liberty View Post
    When government becomes despotic, it is time to ignore government.

    When government uses force, coercion and violence against its people... it is time for its people to respond in kind.

    Authoritarians only understand one thing... raw force.

    If the people don't stand up and forcefully resist... they deserve their enslavement.
    When government becomes despotic, what you say may apply. But we are here talking about the government of the City of Washington, D.C.; which is composed of literally thousands of wannabe despots and resembles nothing so much as an episode of Dynasty that has rear-ended the "Amos 'n Andy Show"; with the whole mess getting T-boned by the "HMS PINAFORE".

    Recently in D.C., a 15 year old kid opened fire on an MPDC cop, hitting him THREE TIMES. The other cops fired on the boy, but THEY MISSED!

    Come and live in Northern Virginia and watch the antics of these inept bumblers across the moat. And race has nothing to do with it. Councilman Jim Graham is white, and he is among the biggest fools on the City Council.

    Pity the DC City police. Their chief, Kathy Lanier, came up through the ranks. Her heart is in the right place, law-enforcement wise. I believe she really and honestly wants to do her best to keep her city as safe as can be. But she is a protoge' of Chief Ramsey, who hailed from that land of the voting dead, Chicago. She subscribes to the notion that "guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people". Never mind that when people with guns kill people, the people they kill almost never have a gun of their own, thanks to the insane phiosophy that Ted Nugent boiled down to the following:

    "Hmm. We have foxes killing the cats in the barnyard. Okay, so here's what we do: we de-claw the cats!"

    It has been said that in America, the Several States are the "labaratories of Democracy".

    And DC wants statehood? DC isn't a "labaratory of democracy". DC is a bunch of frat boys who have invited a gang of winos into the frat house for a fart-lighting contest.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •