Posted on 07/29/2008 6:30:37 PM PDT by neverdem
Democratic lawmakers and leaders are hoping to work out a compromise as early as this week with the National Rifle Association (NRA) on legislation to further loosen gun laws in the District of Columbia.
Reps. John Tanner (D-Tenn.) and John Dingell (D-Mich.) are working with the gun-lobbying group to head off a discharge petition filed last week that would bypass committee to bring a D.C. gun bill directly to the floor.
“Dingell and Tanner are going to negotiate a compromise with the NRA and then show it to the leadership,” said a Democratic aide.
The NRA has threatened to make the signing the petition a “key vote.” That means that Democrats in favor of gun rights who don’t buck leadership to sign it could see their NRA rating suffer.
Some Republicans are angered that the NRA, considered one of the most powerful and effective lobbying operations in Washington, is negotiating with Democrats rather than holding their feet to the fire. One aide called the strategy “naïve.”
But the NRA has reason to bargain, too. The group wants a victory to follow up on the Supreme Court ruling rejecting the District’s ban on handguns. But it is running out of time on the legislative calendar. There is only one day, Sept. 22, left on which a discharge bill can be forced to the floor, and Democrats could sidestep it procedurally by canceling votes that day.
In addition, if Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is elected president, conservative Democrats such as the members of the Blue Dog Coalition are one of the few legislative bulwarks against Democratic attempts to further regulate guns.
Spokesmen for the NRA and Tanner did not return messages seeking comment. Dingell’s office said there was no change from a statement last week that called the situation “very fluid.”
Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) filed the discharge petition last Thursday to bring a bill by Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.), a Blue Dog leader, to the floor. The bill, drafted before the June court ruling, would erase some of the district’s remaining gun laws.
One hundred and nine GOP members have signed the petition. Ross’s bill has 247 co-sponsors, including 56 Democrats.
But even if Souder gets the 218 signatures needed to force the bill to the floor, it will be difficult to get a vote. After the threshold is met, Souder must wait seven legislative days. Then, rules say discharges can only be done on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. That leaves only Sept. 22 for a vote on the gun bill. But the majority can avoid a vote by not going into session on that Monday.
Signing a discharge petition is considered a slap at party leaders. But if Democrats knew there wouldn’t be a floor vote, they might be able to sign the discharge petition with impunity.
Which leaves negotiations. One possible element of a compromise would include allowing District residents to buy guns in Virginia and Maryland and transport them home. Currently, there are no licensed gun dealers in the District, so there is no legal way for residents to get a gun to their home.
you can dance with the Devil but the Devil never changes. - you do.
The traditional wording of my favored compromise is: "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
I’m not sure there’s a great deal of room for compromise - the Supreme Court ruled very specifically and now the gun grabbers are trying to see how far they can go in disobedience. It’s shameful behavior for legislators but perfectly normal.
Right, compromising with democrats mean we give up more rights. NRA, give no ground!!!
There are very legitimate reasons for this compromise, for example, not only would it nullify DC’s firearms laws, it would remove the ball out of DC’s court, meaning that Heller would be the law of the land de facto.
If such a bill is not passed, then DC will be able to claim they complied with Heller, and the possibility exists that there ignoring Heller would be upheld.
To make it short, this would cement Heller.
I don’t actually see that it doesn’t free the city to pass any further legislation it wishes afterward, however. It’s entirely possible I missed that somewhere, though. BTT.
The article is not very specific on what is being proposed.
Par for the course...
L
Wasn't The Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 a compromise between the NRA and Washington DC?
We can see now that it disarmed honest citizens to the point they could not defend themselves even at home. Of course most of us now have 20/20 hindsight.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Time to join GOA.
How would this affect the gun laws in other locales, say Chicago?
its disgusting how the Peoples' business gets compromised with vague language and secrecy, in the face of the Constitution's plain wording and brand spanking new SCOTUS decision...
power-control-money...nra-dnc-rino-o-p...
SSDD...
LFOD...
And they'll tell us it was for our own good.
Then they'll send the fundraising letters warning us about Dingell yet again.
The NRA has spent way too much time on K Street....
L
No one knows Satin Doll, that is why (IMO) they are trying to take DC out of the picture and preserve the Heller Decision.
“if” Heller remains unchanged, then all of those lawsuits in IL will have a chance to move forward, if Heller sues for relief a lower court can cut the legs out of Heller’s newly commented on RTKBA.
I believe that the DC Circuit Court of Appeals is unlikely to reverse it's Heller decision anytime soon. I also believe that the Supreme Court is unlikely to review a DC Circuit Court ruling in favor of Heller.
Thus, it is likely that the DC Circuit Court is going to call the shots with respect to what DC will have for gun laws.
Chicago is not part of the DC Circuit, so such decisions can provide guidance but they are not binding. Chicago will face whatever decisions their own Circuit Court makes. The home run will be if the Supreme Court agrees to hear an appeal from Chicago regarding "incorporation". Such a decision would permit the Supreme Court to dictate to the states that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by ANY government.
I was surprised when the Supreme Court agreed to hear Heller. I didn't think I would see this in my lifetime. Similarly, I didn't think I would see an "incorporation" case at the Supreme Court. I hope to be pleasantly surprised yet again. It should be obvious that Kennedy doesn't believe that our Founders intended for the states to be able to disarm people living on the frontier.
And the “unlikely” part is what this legislative deal is all about, the NRA IMO wishes to remove that doubt and leave Heller standing in DC.
Now that is risky, perhaps he DC Circuit will get “uppity” again and slap down the DC Council’s “emergency” rules that violate Scalia’s majority opinion, or they may not.
I would suggest the following would be a good compromise: if the people in the D.C. government who have been pushing for the ban all resign tomorrow and forfeit any pension or other claims, they will be allowed to escape prosecution for the denial of people’s civil rights.
That seem like a fair compromise?
The Heller decision stands regardless of anything done by Congress or by DC. Heller personally can seek court relief if EITHER of them violate his rights.
To some extent, action by a significant majority of Congress might well send a message to places like Chicago and San Francisco that the days of limitless gun control have passed.
It's really not going to be practical to take every case to the Supreme Court. Lower courts have an obligation to take action to enforce the Constitution and Congress has an obligation not to infringe the right to keep and bear arms.
I think it is generally helpful for governments to read and understand Heller and conform their laws to the Second Amendment. Congress might prevent a good slap-down of DC but that really is their job. It would be too bad,though, to miss seeing the DC Circuit Court appoint a master to register ALL arms in DC at DC's expense.
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.