Posted on 01/19/2012 7:14:29 AM PST by marktwain
The nation’s capital is home to some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Washington city leaders intentionally crafted convoluted regulations to make it difficult for citizens to own firearms legally. Now that these obstructionist rules are in the spotlight, the D.C. Council realizes it needs to clean up its act.
The Washington Times’ Emily Miller has been closely documenting each step required in the process of exercising her Second Amendment right to keep arms. One of these is the mandatory gun “safety” course consisting of four hours of classroom instruction and one hour on the shooting range. For this, the city hands prospective gun owners a long list of instructors who have been certified by the Metropolitan Police Department to teach the class.
As Miss Miller revealed, this sheet of 47 phone numbers hadn’t been updated since September 2009. The majority were cellphones that went directly to voicemail when called, seven lines were out of service, two said they don’t teach the course anymore and one teaches the class only in Colorado and Georgia.
Within a month after Miss Miller’s story appeared, the registry office quietly posted an updated list of instructors online. The new document included Donna Worthy, an instructor who had been trying without success to get on the list for two years, along with another 15 new instructors. The police also deleted 14 obsolete names, undoubtedly saving other residents from wasting time making dead-end calls. The city additionally updated the detailed list of firearms that it will allow residents to purchase.
In July, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals smacked down the city of Chicago over instructional requirements similar to the District’s. The Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association sued the Windy City for requiring training at shooting ranges that were
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
If the 2nd Amendment means anything, why can a state limit this "fundamental right?" That's very much akin to an approved reading list, or a list of approved religions.
Also, the "logic" behind such a list is heavily flawed. What, the guns on the list can't be used to commit crimes?
I would never live in DC or, if I did through no choice of my own, would get out ASAP. Those working in DC can move to northern VA and have any firearm they want, while having an excellent Metro system with which to travel back and forth to work. Heck, would-be gun owners in DC should move to VA simply to offset the liberal government workers who've moved there, and to thereby help return VA to the red side of things.
Hit them personally with civil rights charges. I'll bet dollars to donuts that a discovery order would prove collusion to deprive people of their rights. Throw the clowns in prison.
‘As for carrying her gun illegally, “Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.”’
She should have that inscribed on her gun!
The DC city Council does not want residents shooting at their friends ,the criminals.
>If the 2nd Amendment means anything, why can a state limit this “fundamental right?”
Irrelevant in this case, as DC is not a State.
>That’s very much akin to an approved reading list, or a list of approved religions.
The question that should be raised is that of ‘militia,’ (mentioned in the second amendment) particularly why the people of the militia are not being allowed to have military-grade equipment like the M2 or M249. DC residents are unique in that there is no State or County government to contend with; it is all Federal or City and it is quite arguable that the City government is merely a specific subdivision of the Federal.
>The DC city Council does not want residents shooting at their friends ,the criminals.
And the bureaucrats and congressmen... oh, wait, you DID say criminals. ;)
bttt
The difference between conservative woman and liberal women is a real eye opener. Our are soooo much better.
What SHOULD happen is that Congress should pass a law declaring all states’ CCW permits valid in the District of Columbia, period.
Their defense that this is a matter for the DC “government” is ridiculous, since Congress has the power to legislate “in all cases whatsoever” for DC.
Whether or not Congress wants to legislate on the narrow subject of CCW for DC residents is up to them. If it were up to me, I would abolish the phenomenon of DC “residency” by declaring all persons residing in the District and not claiming State citizenship in one of the 50 states citizens of Maryland, amending the Constitution if necessary to accomplish this. All DC “residents” would then elect representatives and Senators in the Maryland Legislature and vote for two Senators and (probably) a Member of Congress from Maryland.
This would, of course, make Maryland suck even worse (sorry ‘bout that), but it would lance a longstanding boil and prevent, permanently, DC statehood, which would be much, much worse, because it would result in four commie US Senators instead of two.
we should just have the feds declare automatic national reciprocity. This means anyone with a ccw permit anywhere it is valid everywhere.
(I would also like to see “safe harbor” lockers for secure areas to prevent the kind of idiocy that happens in NYC)
I don’t believe Congress has the power to impose 50 state CCW, and if they did, they would misuse it.
Their power over CCW in DC is absolute, and unquestionable.
I was thinking cross state recognition being forced like a DL license.
1) Congress does not require DL reciprocity.
2) The “full faith and credit” clause is subject to such rules and exceptions as Congress shall make. What do you think Congress would do to free states if THEY were writing a national CCW law?
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.