Posted on 05/17/2016 10:11:13 AM PDT by jazusamo
The fight over Second Amendment rights in the nation’s capital has entered a new phase. A federal judge has ruled that the city’s concealed carry law is likely unconstitutional, citing the “good reason provision” in the injunction order on Tuesday (via WaPo ):
For the second time in as many years, a federal judge in Washington ordered the city to halt enforcement of its new, concealed-carry law, requiring applicants to state “good reason” to carry a weapon in order to obtain a permit from police.The preliminary injunction was contained in a 46-page ruling Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon that will be in force pending further litigation. Leon declared the District’s gun-permitting system is likely unconstitutional. The system was adapted by the District after its long-standing ban on carrying firearms in public was overturned at court order in 2014.
Understandable considering it came out of DC. Almost never anything good comes from that swamp.
Last time I was there, I had an opportunity to take out Al Franken with the hood of my car.
I never could make proper decisions.
Or if this would happen here in New York, Detroit Portland or Chicago.
“All they do is pass gun laws that get struck down.”
And until those laws are struck down, they are laws enforced as laws. The legislature’s new standard procedure is to enact whatever law they want, and just replace it with a practical (but differently worded) equivalent. Upon doing so, it takes years of litigation to repeat the cycle.
This will continue until some judge seriously strikes down a law, effective immediately with no restriction on purchase & import of guns, and jails the entire legislature for a prolonged period for wanton contempt of court.
The DC gun laws have been shot down repeatedly. They have no qualms about replacing ‘em with new equally oppressive laws.
In just about every other thing we win and walk away. A few years later we are bewildered to discover that our victory has been turned on it's head and it is now the "law of the land" and we had better not think of challenging it.
They never stop attacking. Neither should we.
And as flawed as they are this is something that the NRA understands and does.
Imagine if the “Good Reason” clause were “amended” to the other Amendments!
Like the 1st:
Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, And Freedom of Association...BUT, only if you have a “Good reason” to need those things.
I would say that it will be between 75 and 99% of Congressmen/women voting for Hillary. They consider her to be one of them. They do not consider Donald to be one of them. “Them” being the ruling class. they lump Donald in with us as being their slaves, workers, and drones.
Amen to that.
I don't think it would be very hard to come up with at least a dozen good reasons to 'concealed carry' in DC.
It has one of the higher crimes rates of any place in the US.
Someone send these DIMs a copy of the Constitution...and someone to read it to these morons.
Too late for this, sadly. Until at least crew-served weapons can be deployed (M60, mortars, Claymores, RPGs. etc.) the Army and Marines now have the superiority.
“DC is not capable of home rule. “
If Hillary is elected the Democrats will push to give DC a voting representative in the House and two Senators.
The land on which the city now sits was given to the federal government by the state of Maryland. The state of Virginia also gave the federal government land (present day Arlington). It was returned to Virginia in the 1800’s.
Congress should pass a bill returning the land to Maryland with exception the area where federal buildings and monuments lie as a federal district, not unlike a national park or military reservation. The only residence in the federal district would be the White House so the issue of “representation” would no longer be valid. The current residents of DC would become citizens of Maryland and be represented in Congress by a Maryland representative and the two Maryland senators. The president, first lady, and any adult members of the president’s family residing at the White House can maintain residency for voting purposes in their respective home state(s).
Unfortunately Ryan and McConnell aren’t forward thinkers.
GOOD REASON: Because the Constitution says I can!
Nuff said.
When will she "be allowed" to carry it for protection?
You'll know when you look out the window and see..........
You need a permit to carry a concealed weapon in DC?! Wow. I’m glad I live in Alaska and winter in Arizona.
The “good Reason” I carry is because the Constitution says I can. Good reason enough!!
The full quote:
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
Noah Webster — An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (1787).
>> The Congress shall have power...To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District <<
Very interesting in that the language here doesn’t mention whether the POTUS can veto such legislation.
Maybe he does have that power, but on the other hand, maybe this provision is a special case where POTUS vetoes would not apply.
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.