Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

H. R. 6691 To Restore Second Amendment Rights in The District of Columbia.
U.S. Congress ^ | 7/1/08 | Staff

Posted on 09/16/2008 8:52:54 AM PDT by epow

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: ctdonath2
Yeah, I watched on C-Span while the hypocritical anti-gun Dems steamrolled the pro-gunners and passed that outrageous fraud of a bill that does nothing to relieve the unconstitutional situation in D.C.

But it does give the Dimrats in pro-gun states an opportunity to claim that the Dimrat Congress did something really important to protect their gun rights. IMHO, that was all that bill was intended to do from the beginning.

Big surprise, Democrats are both frauds AND liars!! Who wudda thunk?

21 posted on 09/17/2008 1:12:08 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
Yeah, I watched on C-Span while the hypocritical anti-gun Dems steamrolled the pro-gunners and passed that outrageous fraud of a bill that does nothing to relieve the unconstitutional situation in D.C.

But it does give the Dimrats in pro-gun states an opportunity to claim that the Dimrat Congress did something really important to protect their gun rights. IMHO, that was all that bill was intended to do from the beginning.

Big surprise, Democrats are both frauds AND liars!! Who wudda thunk?

22 posted on 09/17/2008 1:12:34 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: epow
Let's not be too hard on 'em. The bill takes DC from "next to nothing legal" to "NY legal", which is a delightfully huge step in the right direction (and exquisitely painful for the Leftists who felt compelled to sign on). Sure it ain't GA, VT or AK rules, but WAY better than what there was two days ago.

Methinks the NRA had a quiet chat with some legislators, saying "if you don't go where we want you to, SCOTUS will use YOU to throw out ALL bans and ALL registration". Do wish DC had been left to its own devices, we couldn't have asked for a better self-defeating opponent...

23 posted on 09/17/2008 1:19:38 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (The average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. - Ratatouille)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: epow

Sorry about the double post. FR is so slow nowadays that I often can’t tell if my posts go through on the first click or not. Is it FR’s website or just my puter, is anybody else having a similar problem?


24 posted on 09/17/2008 1:21:32 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2

I guess I missed something about the bill that passed. I was under the impression that without the Childers(?) amendment the bill was worthless. I read that all semiauto guns are still classified in the D.C. as full auto NFA guns and can’t be registered. What is different than before in the D.C.’s gun laws now?


25 posted on 09/17/2008 1:34:19 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: epow

It’s hard to follow what’s happening, hard to find what they’re actually voting on.

DC just announced that all semi-autos are legal, but mags are limited to 10 rounds.

The text of HR6691 I read, like most bills, is a long series of cut-and-paste directives, leaving one to guess what the final result will actually look like. Between the lines I gather NFA items remain illegal in DC.

I don’t know what this Childers amendment is about.

I suspect the legislators don’t exactly know what they’re voting on either.


26 posted on 09/17/2008 1:51:31 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (The average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. - Ratatouille)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: epow

Double posts happen. Don’t worry about it - especially when it’s happening to frequently to everyone else, like now.


27 posted on 09/17/2008 1:52:53 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (The average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. - Ratatouille)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
I googled up THIS but I'm still confused. If I understand any of this, and I may not, the new D.C law will allow semiautos to be registered but the federal bill that passed last night doesn't allow D.C. residents to buy handguns in VA or MD as the Childers amendment would have.

I may be wrong on all of that, but it does appear that the bill is not entirely useless and some of the most egregious sections of the D.C. law will be gone if the Senate passes it. But the article suggests that the Senate may hold it over until next year, probably on the assumption that Obama will be elected and will veto it after it's passed both houses of Congress.

But if the D.C. council changes their gun laws as the article says they are doing the D.C won't be far out of line with the laws of most other big cities even if the House bill isn't passed by the Senate. Not that that's good enough, but definitely a big improvement,

We have our own problems here in GA. The Atlanta airport manager and the Atlanta mayor have ordered the airport cops to arrest any Georgia Firearms Licence holder found carrying a gun on airport property that isn't under federal law in spite of an existing GA law that nullifies all local gun laws. A lawsuit has been filed to block that order, but the anti-gun Atlanta judge has put off hearing the suit until next month, probably hoping the feds will override the state law as far as the airport is concerned before the suit is heard.

The Atlanta metro area politicos will never quit, no matter how many improvements the General Assembly makes in our gun laws the metro officials try to find ways to get around them.

28 posted on 09/17/2008 2:51:53 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
I googled up THIS but I'm still confused. If I understand any of this, and I may not, the new D.C law will allow semiautos to be registered but the federal bill that passed last night doesn't allow D.C. residents to buy handguns in VA or MD as the Childers amendment would have.

I may be wrong on all of that, but it does appear that the bill is not entirely useless and some of the most egregious sections of the D.C. law will be gone if the Senate passes it. But the article suggests that the Senate may hold it over until next year, probably on the assumption that Obama will be elected and will veto it after it's passed both houses of Congress.

But if the D.C. council changes their gun laws as the article says they are doing the D.C won't be far out of line with the laws of most other big cities even if the House bill isn't passed by the Senate. Not that that's good enough, but definitely a big improvement,

We have our own problems here in GA. The Atlanta airport manager and the Atlanta mayor have ordered the airport cops to arrest any Georgia Firearms Licence holder found carrying a gun on airport property that isn't under federal law in spite of an existing GA law that nullifies all local gun laws. A lawsuit has been filed to block that order, but the anti-gun Atlanta judge has put off hearing the suit until next month, probably hoping the feds will override the state law as far as the airport is concerned before the suit is heard.

The Atlanta metro area politicos will never quit, no matter how many improvements the General Assembly makes in our gun laws the metro officials try to find ways to get around them.

29 posted on 09/17/2008 2:52:29 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: epow
I don't get it. If the law banning firearms in DeeCee was ruled unConstitutional; doesn't that in effect restore the 2nd Amendment rights to the city?

No I didn't read the post, just the headlines.

30 posted on 09/17/2008 2:54:33 PM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: epow

&%*@&#, I did it AGAIN!! I must be doing something wrong on this end, I seem to be the only one making double posts.


31 posted on 09/17/2008 2:55:03 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird
I don't get it either, but I'm trying. Apparently the D.C. city council began allowing residents to register their handguns after Heller was decided, which was a major objective of Heller's original lawsuit, but they still don't allow residents to keep a fully assembled and loaded gun in their homes, and they aren't allowed to carry a gun even in their own homes. The article I linked in a previous post says that the council is now planning to revise the laws to make it legal for residents to own and keep loaded and assembled guns in their homes. The are also allowing semiauto guns in the district now, but before they had semiautos classified as full auto guns and they were illegal in the district.

Like I have been saying, it's very confusing, and a lot of it is above my pay grade. (=:

32 posted on 09/17/2008 3:06:42 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: epow
I should have mentioned that AS I UNDERSTAND IT, even before Heller was decided the district didn't technically ban handguns. But they cleverly made the laws so that even though you could possess a handgun in your home if it was unloaded and partially disassembled you were still violating the law if it wasn't properly registered. But the catch 22 was that you couldn't have a handgun after the law was passed that wasn't registered in your name BEFORE the NEW registration law went into effect in 1976.

Therefore very few of the handguns in existence in the D.C after 1976 were registered in the proper time frame and were illegal to possess before Heller was decided, and those that were registered in time had to be disassembled and unloaded in the home or business,which of course made them practically useless for home defense.Apparently all that Heller did for D.C/ gun owners was to force the city to register whatever handguns the people now have whether or not they were owned before the 1976 registration law.

Again, I have to add a qualifier. I am not certain about any of this complicated mess, and if you are in the D.C. do not take anything I say here as factual so you won't get in trouble with the local yokels.

33 posted on 09/17/2008 3:46:26 PM PDT by epow (""In selecting men for office let principle be your guide, Look to his character" Noah Webster, 1823)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson