Posted on 01/13/2008 2:55:40 PM PST by Enterprise
In the coming months, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of Washington, D.C.’s ban on handgun ownership and self-defense in law-abiding residents’ homes. The Court will first address the question of whether the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as embodied in the Bill of Rights, protects the rights of individuals or a right of the government. If the Court agrees that this is an individual right, they will then determine if D.C.’s self-defense and handgun bans are constitutional.
(Excerpt) Read more at nraila.org ...
The position of the National Rifle Association is clear. The Second Amendment protects the fundamental, individual right of law-abiding citizens to own firearms for any lawful purpose. Further, any law infringing this freedom, including a ban on self-defense and handgun ownership, is unconstitutional and provides no benefit to curbing crime. Rather, these types of restrictions only leave the law-abiding more susceptible to criminal attack.
The U.S. Government, through its Solicitor General, has filed an amicus brief in this case. We applaud the government’s recognition that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental, individual right that is “central to the preservation of liberty.” The brief also correctly recognizes that the D.C. statutes ban “a commonly-used and commonly-possessed firearm in a way that has no grounding in Framing-era practice,” the Second Amendment applies to the District of Columbia, is not restricted to service in a militia and secures the natural right of self-defense.
However, the government’s position is also that a “heightened” level of judicial scrutiny should be applied to these questions. The National Rifle Association believes that the Court should use the highest level of scrutiny in reviewing the D.C. gun ban. We further believe a complete ban on handgun ownership and self-defense in one’s own home does not pass ANY level of judicial scrutiny. Even the government agrees that “the greater the scope of the prohibition and its impact on private firearm possession, the more difficult it will be to defend under the Second Amendment.” A complete ban is the kind of infringement that is the greatest in scope. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit correctly ruled that D.C.’s statutes are unconstitutional. We strongly believe the ruling should be upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The National Rifle Association will be filing an amicus brief in this case and will provide additional information to our members as this case moves through the legal process.
Please refer questions to NRA Grassroots at 1-800-392-8683.
Are long guns allowed for home defense in DC?
The article seems to talk about just handguns
Finally a “clean” 2nd Amendment case for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Giving the bunch of BS the Jorge justice department filed the other day, in their brief, I don’t know?
The numerous and far-reaching infringements on Americans’ rights to use keep and bear arms is so extensive in some places that no ruling by the USSC short of complete erasure of the 2nd amendment and any trace of its memory will enable the legal continuance those violations of human rights. The state of infringements on Americans’ rights is extreme and a great many “citizens” seem to be cheering the loss of more of their freedoms. Millions seem poised to vote, with a smile, for more government taxation and restriction. And, I have not yet spoken with a single one of them who seems to have the slightest understanding of what they are doing beyond feeling they are on some political party’s “team” or feeling that anyone who wants to be free is a nut because TV personalities in suits harumph at the mention of such quaint notions.
Just my 1.4 cents (devalued from 2 cents).
Jorge the Mexican is knifing us once again.
I believe if the court rules for DC it will be the start of a civil war!
When roasting a frog, it is important that the temperature be increased gradually.
Proof of the current success of our public schools in indoctrination and brainwashing rather than their former purpose of education.
Proof that the purpose of the public school system was indoctrination, and brainwashing from the word go. This was always the intent, to indoctrinate little cogs for the great industrial machine of "the State"...
the infowarrior
To answer your question:
If you have the proper permits for them, you can own long guns and keep them in your house. They must be either A.) trigger locked, B.) disassembled such that they could not be rendered operational immediately, or I think C.) locked in a safe/vault and not accessable. In all instances, the long gun must be unloaded. You cannot possess any long guns that are not registered to you. You cannot possess any rounds of ammo that are not of the caliber of any of the long guns you own. The only time you can have a gun loaded for any reason is if you are at a firing range, which there are none in the limits of the District of Columbia that are open to the public.
So it kind of defeats the purpose for keeping a long gun for self defense if you cannot have immediate access to it, and then still have to load it...
No.
But DC promises to not prosecute you if you actually use it justifiably.
Is it permissable to use a long gun for self-defense in the home if you have applied for law enforcement permission in advance, specified the time, nature, and intent of the break-in, and how many rounds/perpetrator you intend to fire?(/ sarc)
Only a slave would pay attention to any of that nonsense.
Just being ornery towards mindless bureaucrats.
And I’m going to guess they would consider having a full mag anywhere near a firearm to be a no-no as well
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.