Taking Aim at D.C.’s Gun Law

Newsweek ^ | July 30, 2007 - | Daren Briscoe

[neverdem]

A wealthy libertarian is bankrolling a challenge to D.C.’s gun regulations—the most restrictive in the country. What drives him—and his take on whether the case will go to the Supreme Court.

The District of Columbia has the most restrictive gun laws in the country. But that’s a distinction the nation’s capital will soon lose—if Robert Levy prevails. Levy was born in Washington, but left years ago; a resident of Naples, Fla., who made a fortune as an investment analyst, he is now a senior fellow in constitutional studies at the libertarian Cato Institute. A critic of what he sees as unnecessary government regulation, he rounded up six D.C. plaintiffs who either owned firearms or wanted to, for self-protection, and helped bankroll their challenge to the city’s gun law—which makes it illegal to own or possess an unregistered handgun (D.C. stopped registering handguns back in 1978). The city permits registered “long” guns like shotguns and rifles, but they must be disassembled or disabled with trigger locks, and it’s illegal to use a firearm of any kind in self-defense—even in the owner’s home. The suit, which is being bankrolled by Levy, has been successful so far; in March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found the gun law unconstitutional. Earlier this month, D.C. officials announced plans to take the case (Parker v. District of Columbia) to the Supreme Court, in hopes of having the appeals court’s ruling overturned. If the high court agrees to hear Parker, it could finally settle one of the biggest arguments in constitutional law: whether the Second Amendment’s right to “keep and bear arms” is an individual right or was meant to apply only to members of a “well-regulated militia.” NEWSWEEK’s Daren Briscoe spoke with Levy about the suit’s prospects, and what drove him to...

[neverdem]

Parker v. Washington D.C. in HTML courtesy of zeugma.

[RexBeach]

As the old saying goes: “Criminals like gun control laws. It makes their jobs safer.”

Good for this guy standing up to the gun-grabbers in DC.

[George from New England]

It’s such a shame that conservatives must bank roll a fight for OBVIOUS constitutional rights. Take the idiots out of office and bring this country back to its roots.

We need a revolution.

[Graybeard58]

The man who is financing this doesn’t own a gun himself but believes in the constitution.

[kingu]

whether the Second Amendment’s right to “keep and bear arms” is an individual right or was meant to apply only to members of a “well-regulated militia.”

Short argument: Everyone was eligible to be part of the militia.

I don't get how they can find secret parts of the constitution that state that abortion is an issue of privacy, or that 'limited time' means an author's lifetime plus seventy years, yet choose to restrict the one amendment that ensures that all of the rest will be protected.

Oh... Wait, that must be why.

[AdamSelene235]

More evil libertarians for the FR crowd to despise.

[Tabi Katz]

Earlier this month, D.C. officials announced plans to take the case (Parker v. District of Columbia) to the Supreme Court, in hopes of having the appeals court’s ruling overturned

Guess that means no armed bodyguards for them, huh? Liberal hypocrisy knows no limits.

[beltfed308]

Everyone knows that the 2nd only applies to the federal govt and not the individual states.

or

The 2nd only applies to state militias approved by the governor.

or

A collective right.

or

Ad nauseam ......

[beltfed308]

It’s such a shame that conservatives must bank roll a fight for OBVIOUS constitutional rights.

The guys a libertarian.

[beltfed308]

Ping!

[Jason_b]

DC is a very special place. The States protected their Citizens' right to arms prior to the Constitution. This is as it should be. Whe DC was created, it was by definition new. It had no history, no tradition, no legal inheritance. It was given what the founders gave it, a small piece of land and Congress got exclusive jurisdiction, and I've found conflicting stories about what that means: mainly that Virginia and Maryland shouldn't think they retain jurisdiction over the area they ceded to DC. DC was created like a blank canvas, starting from zero, gun rights never existed for DC residents because there was no tradition of gun rights for the new government. The States inherited theirs, the English Common Law, the Magna Carta, and were powerless to get rid of those even if they wanted. But DC being new, there was no obligation to make it look and feel like a state. Congress was free to experiment. The Constitution BOR simply prevents Congress from interfering with the rights of States and their Citizens. It doesn't grant rights to anyone, nor does it guarantee rights to anyone. It is a negative on what Congress can do to States. For the last of you who will invoke inalienable rights, good luck in DC. DC was created for the express purpose (or may as well have been) of not being encumbered by inalienable rights or anything else that encumbered the States. Congress and its DC don't have to honor any claims to gun rights to those under its jurisdiction. What is alarming is that everyone is under its jurisdiction now.

Before you call me a nut, read 40 Cal 311, People v. De La Guerra. More is on my about page.

[RC2]

The only problem I have, and let me say, I hate gun control, but.......have you ever been to DC? Would you want those people to be carrying around guns? Tough questions but look at Los Angeles and Detroit. Look at the gangs that are out of control. I don’t know the answer and gun control is not the answer but no one has addressed what we do about the problems in these cities. It’s out of control.

[DuncanWaring]

...have you ever been to DC? Would you want those people to be carrying around guns?

Doesn't matter if I want them to or not ... they already are.

What I want is for the law-abiding people there to be able to carry.

[goldstategop]

I would NEVER obey a law that made it illegal for me to defend myself. It violates a right that pre-existed the law itself and which is essential to repelling aggression against one's person. Whatever the merit of banning guns might be, NO government has the right to forbid ANY ONE from defending their life.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[tracer]

That's "libertarian" with a small "l." I've met and spoken with Mr. Levy and found him to be a brilliant man.

As for the Cato Institute, any outfit that seeks to privatize Social "Security" is OK in my book. It's a fascinating organization full to the brim with brilliant and personable folk.

And a close friend of mine used to work there and got to know them well. Great and classy social events attended by a veritable Who's Who of the few genuinely brilliant thinkers in DeeeSeee....

[tracer]

That's "libertarian" with a small "l." I've met and spoken with Mr. Levy and found him to be a brilliant man.

As for the Cato Institute, any outfit that seeks to privatize Social "Security" is OK in my book. It's a fascinating organization full to the brim with brilliant and personable folk.

And a close friend of mine used to work there and got to know them well. Great and classy social events attended by a veritable Who's Who of the few genuinely brilliant thinkers in DeeeSeee....

[july4thfreedomfoundation]

How about banning membership in gangs?

Lengthy prison terms for anyone who is a gang member.

[tracer]

Swine cordless mouse!! Sorry to keep repeating myself....

[from occupied ga]

Would you want those people to be carrying around guns?

The very ones you wouldn't want already are.

[jpl]

The dirty little secret of gun control laws is that even most Democrats and liberals don't really believe in them in spite of their rhetoric, which is why it's a political loser for them. Carl Rowan owned a gun in spite of railing against guns during his entire career.

Our new Democrat Senator Jim Webb more or less openly defies the ban and brings his guns into the city with him from Virginia.