District Leaders Announce New Handgun Regulations

The Washington Post ^ | July 14, 2008 | Robert E. Pierre and Marcia Davis

[Bubba_Leroy]

District residents will be able to keep a handgun in the home for self-defense but that right would be limited to the home and not outside it, city leaders said today, announcing new gun regulations in response to the Supreme Court's recent ruling striking down the city's handgun ban.

Gun owners will have to pass vision and written tests, provide a photo with their application to register a gun, and submit their weapon for ballistics testing. Guns will also still require trigger locks.

Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) and interim Attorney General Peter J. Nickles announced the regulations alongside D.C. Council Chairman Vincent G. Gray (D), Phil Mendelson (D-At Large) and several other council members.

The regulations are an effort to maintain some gun control while complying with the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 ruling last month.

[Redcloak]

Gun owners will have to pass vision... tests

No right to self-defense for the visually impaired? That won't pass muster with the ADA.

[JerseyHighlander]

I think the WaPo was taking some politico’s press brief and filing it as a report.

Residents could begin applying this week for handgun permits in a process that requires a written examination, proof of residency, good vision and ballistic testing. Applicants also would have to pay a fee and agree to fingerprinting and criminal background checks.

Written examinations for Constitutional Rights are better quickly be ruled illegal. Again.

TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 20 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1971
§ 1971. Voting rights

Good vision requirements are simply illegal under the ADA if the 2nd Amendment is a Right and not a Privilege.

It’s also specifically illegal to charge a fee to take a written and/or literacy test to exercise a Constitutional Right. That is a Civil Rights Act violation.

So what’s left? Proof of Residency, ballistic testing, fingerprinting and criminal background checks.

[piytar]

Huh. The last few I’ve gotten are decent locks with a cable to block the action of the firearm. Not really a trigger lock, but within the law. From the replies I’ve gotten to my post, my experience is the exception.

[river rat]

This is the D.C. City Council as of Aug. 2007.

Any city with Marion Barry (Standing 3rd from right) on the City Council - shows the nature of the $#@$#@$%#@ with the privilege of the vote.

John Adams was right about the care required in granting the privilege of voting.......We didn't listen and this is the consequence.

The Nation's Capital -- mismanaged by one of the most bumbling and corrupt City Councils in America...giving us some of the most dangerous sections of any city, and one of the worst, most ineffective and expensive Public School systems in the world.

[backhoe]

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t they get?

[.44 Special]

Not only can you sue them but you can file a complaint with the attorney general for deprivation of civil rights and criminal conspiracy to deprive one of those rights. It is definitely a conspiracy.

If we hit these bastards hard enough each time they try these phoney baloney tactics they will soon wise up. The gun-owning public should start these cases by filing civil rights complaints where ever necessary.

You cannot tax me or charge me a fee to allow me my rights (ccw permits should be free!). You cannot require me to undergo examinations to obtain my rights. You cannot make me sign incrimination statements to enable me to exercise my rights. If the government suspects that I am a criminal or a mental defective the task and burden proof is up to them.

You cannot limit my rights to suit your political need.

[wolfcreek]

“The regulations are an effort to maintain some gun control while complying with the Supreme Court’s 5 to 4 ruling last month”

How about ammo? Do we get to have ammo?

[angkor]

Syllabus
3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment... the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT No. 07–290.
Argued March 18, 2008—Decided June 26, 2008

[wolfcreek]

If someone comes to your house in a threatening manner, you are allowed to let the weapon be visually presented but, not the barrel end. You are allowed to shake the weapon in the air but, not point in the general direction of the supposed threatening person. You are not allowed to remove the safety device or actually load ammunition into the weapon until after you have called the police to notify them of the supposedly threatening person or persons and then only at the direction of the person of authority on the telephone.

[angkor]

See #128:

"[T]he trigger-lock requirement ... is hence unconstitutional."

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER

[Tulsa Ramjet]

So if Helen Keller was being raped, she would have to accept it?

[pleikumud]

To put the First Amendment on an equal footing with the Second, journalists should have to pass a government background check before anything they write is published. There should be a three day waiting period, with government review, of all editorials and letters to the editor.

Every non-criminal in DC should buy a gun, learn how to use it, and carry it to work.

[CholeraJoe]

What difference would it make? She’s been dead 40 years.

[Puppage]

If it’s all firearms, I’ll try to avoid them.

See post # 26

[TeleStraightShooter]

Clearly a case of conspiracy to violate the civil rights of the Citizens of DC

[kevkrom]

The artist that did the Obama cover is questionable

The majority opinion clearly frowned upon trigger locks, but the remedy granted in the case referred only to the issuing of permits.

If DC wants to lose again, though, they can keep this up.

[BCR #226]

Well, lets see...

SCOTUS can fine the city. They can send in Federal Marshalls to enforce compliance. They can prosecute the city counsel. They can “clarify” their ruling and give the city a chance to comply. SCOTUS can suspend city operations if it gets extreme.

These are a few options open to SCOTUS.

Mike

[TC Rider]

Rifle came with one when I bought it.

Still in the bag.

The bottom drawer of my reloading bench is full of them, I should probably give them all to the local PD for distribution to po people.

I do keep an S&W and Taurus key on my keychain for the built in locks. I don't lock mine, but I've seen guys show up at the range who forgot to unlock theirs and left the key at home. (an error that's rarely repeated)

[KansasGirl]

“Gun owners will have to pass vision and written tests”

Why is this constitutional but testing to be allowed to vote is unconstitutional?

[KansasGirl]

“provide a photo with their application to register a gun,”

But we better not have laws requiring a photo id to vote. That’s discriminatory.

Liberals are such hypocrites.