Posted on 07/14/2008 5:09:07 PM PDT by Bubba_Leroy
They just don’t get it, do they?
It is my understanding that between June 26th and now, there were NO ANTI-GUN LAWS in effect in the District of Criminals. Therefore between then and now, anyone could have legally bought ANYTHING from ANYONE, subject only to the Infringements of the Fed.gov! Why not buy it NOW, and SAY you bought it then???
It is to make sure that a majority of citizens are criminals at any given time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bingo, these offspring of feminine canines don’t want law abiding citizens, they want us all to be lawbreakers and they want us to feel very guilty about it!
Is it STILL too soon to just shoot the bastards?
They get it. They just don't care. Unless the President or the Congress gets involved, they see no need to obey the Heller decision. It's time for the Congress to use its "exclusive" legislative authority over the District.
And while both should be held to a very high standard [being entrusted with life & liberty] and should be prosecuted for violations, the scum that bold faced says F.U to The People by blatantly drafting and passing 'law' that is in obvious conflict with established case law [such as Heller] or plain English [such as 'shall not be infringed' ] shouldve been summarily bound and publicly lynched or shot on the council lawn...
ANYTHING less, which is what weve NOT done in a hundred years, just furthers the degradation of the Republic and allows these POS continue their agenda...
The Govzilla monster has outgrown its cage and individually we all know we're martyr wannabes if we oil the pitchfork alone...
that is why it will continue to be litigated till hell freezes over or socialism finally wins...whichever comes first...
LFOD...
In DC’s case, I thing the awkward time passed years ago.
“DC can’t afford to fight another lawsuit and they can’t justify the expense to the tax payers.”
Are you kidding? Tyrants will not spare a nickel your money in order to enslave you.
Don’t worry. They said you could unlock and or assemble it IF you thought that your life might be in immediate danger. Wasn’t that nice of them?
If a cop arrests someone for something that is not a crime, the cop should at minimum receive a written reprimand and, more importantly, no longer be able to claim ignorance.
BTW, one thing I would like to see would be a means by which citizens could participate in prosecutions. Given the rules against double jeopardy, having a separate trial for the state prosecutor and a private one wouldn't be practical, but allowing both state and private prosecutors to present evidence and examine witnesses might not be unreasonable. Currently, there's nothing to prevent states from deliberately throwing certain cases (especially against government employees). If a private prosecutor could introduce evidence and ask questions that the state prosecutor neglected, that would seem to solve that problem.
As to whether private prosecutors should only be allowed when government officials are on trial, or whether their role should be broader, I don't know. Applying the concept more broadly would have some advantages, but also some risks. What would you think?
However, IMO, IF we could toss 90% of the 'laws' on the books, [of which most are pretty unconstitutional in spirit, if not on the face] then the system would work more transparently and the goons that attempt to write this kinda crap wouldnt have much cover anyhow...tar and feathers would become a fashion statement for socialists once again...
I said elsewhere that 2000 yrs ago politicians were considered scum even by sinners' standards...the US revolution was a high point [where good men 'served' and actually led] and now we are full circle to the bottom feeders...AGAIN...
the 'lesson' may be right around the corner for those who think man has any redeeming qualities when entrenched with unlimited power... my .02
Double jeopardy protection applies to everyone in all criminal proceedings. The role of private prosecutors would only be to present questions, arguments, and evidence that the state's attorney does not; such presentation would occur at the same trial as the state's.
BTW, I would suggest that the same approach should be involved in cases that involve overlapping state and federal jurisdiction; the defendant should be allowed to have both sets of charges heard by the same jury.
unless the system was reduced 90%...
Have you ever been summoned [deputy on the front porch, papers in hand] to "garbage court" ??? I have
Neuter the beast, reduce that pure number of restrictions of freedom [laws]...thats my vision...
LFOD...
3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this
Cite as: 554 U. S. ____ (2008) 3
Syllabus
prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, 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. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home. Pp. 56–64. 478 F. 3d 370, affirmed.
But does it say specifically that the locks must be used?
My guess is that if the locks are NOT in use and a registered gun is used unlawfully or by someone not legally able to use one, then that will be the basis for legal action against the registered user. EX: If it's stolen from the home and used in a crime.
This is “Jim Crow” for firearms..ironic huh? I live across the river from our nations’ capital in Virginia. There is an old saying here, that if I am injured in D.C., please get me across the 14th St. bridge to Va. before you call an ambulance. At this very moment, the D.C. real estate tax office is reeling from an investigation into the theft of an estimated 50 million dollars by the head of that office. The WaPo is currently running a series on the bothched investigation into the 2001 murder of Chandra Levy, the intern who was having an affair with congressman Gary Condit (D-Ca). My apologies to residents of D.C., but to quote The Joker-Jack Nicholson...”This town needs an enema.”
I swear I normally shoot one shot at a time...lessin their was a liberal, radical envirowhack in the sights ....Then I might lock on the trigger and let er’ rip till I’m completely out of lead!
Well, it sure didn’t take ‘em long to show their contempt of court and the Ten Amendments. They act like they don’t even belong in this country and probably will welcome the Obamas into their outlaw District with their contempt for our national traditions and culture!!!
The constitution trumps this leftist council of pigs. I urge DC residents to ignore these directives and enjoy their full constitutional rights.
The right to keep and bear arms is as much a right as the right to vote. So since the court has ruled you can’t require a test to vote, I don’t see how they will allow a written test to own a handgun.
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.