DC Plans To Implement System For Registering Guns, Draft New Legislation

[ProguninTN]

Enforcing a Ruling

Another way is via the military. (Ex. See National Guard being used to enforce integration of Central High School in Little Rock, AR).

 

[tulsamal]

Another way is via the military. (Ex. See National Guard being used to enforce integration of Central High School in Little Rock, AR).

Well, yeah, but the "military" didn't just decide to get involved. Enforcement of the law is the job of the Executive Branch. And President Eisenhower decided the military had to be used. But you have your facts a little sideways. The Gov of Arkansas called out the Ark NG to STOP the black students. It was Eisenhower's outrage at that action that led to his decision to send in the 101st Airborne!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rock_Integration_Crisis

Gregg

 

[K-Romulus]

DC's "Attorney general" just said on the DC NPR station that handguns will be required to have trigger locks at all times. When pressed by the host on how that jibes with the Heller decision, he said "they don't impede self-defense because they can be removed in a split-second."

 

[Prince Yamato]

He simply can't ban semi-auto handguns... he can't. The ruling specifically stated handguns. That meant all types. He's an idiot if he thinks he can stand against the Supreme Court ruling. Moreover I'm going to bet that magazine capacity restrictions will be null and void, based on the common usage exception. A Glock 17 contains a STANDARD CAPACITY 17 round magazine. A reduced capacity magazine is not common, it's an exception to the rule.

Moreover, there should be no law prohibiting the swapping of magazines between Glocks or other firearms with this capacity. They were designed to do so and this capability is common to many popular handguns.

 

[Kharn]

K-Romulus:
I guess somebody's city-issued bonus depends on the hours he's in court per month.

Kharn

 

[K-Romulus]

The "Attorney General" kept talking on the show and said the semi-auto ban stems from "all being easily convertible to full auto, and thus equally 'dangerous' under Heller" as a purpose-built full-auto.

Here is a WashPost article I just saw that talks about the trigger lock rule:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/26/AR2008062603988_pf.html

excerpt:

Nickles said that one such "reasonable restriction" would be for the District to continue to require guns to be fitted with trigger locks, although they would not have to be kept unloaded.

"My view is, if you allow handgun registration and require trigger locks, that ought to satisfy the court both in terms of the individual being able to protect himself and, at the same time, provide a reasonable restriction to protect the public safety," he said.

 

[DrewH]

When anti-gunners (and gun ignorant people in general) say semiautomatics, they often have no idea what that really means and think it means scary looking "assault weapons". If Nickles says that semiautos can be converted to full auto to easily, sounds like that is what he is thinking.

It will be a bit of an educational process for these guys-but I think it would really be a stretch to ban semi-auto handguns after this ruling, even with DC's goofy definition of machine gun.

 

[Cougfan2]

I am guessing that Fenty et al will find out rather quickly that the Justices don't have much of a sense of humor when politicians try to circumvent their rulings. Look for a big time slappin' here.

 

[Deanimator]

The problem is that DC's laws catagorize any weapon that can hold more than 12 rounds (regardless of if that is with the stock magazine or an aftermarket one) as a machine gun, and is thus banned.

That's not a problem at all. The decision struck down bans on COMMON firearms. An M1911 or a Glock is the very epitome of a commonly available firearm. I HOPE Fenty tries that tack. He must REALLY crave the feeling of Justice Roberts' knee in his groin.

 

[Deanimator]

DC's "Attorney general" just said on the DC NPR station that handguns will be required to have trigger locks at all times. When pressed by the host on how that jibes with the Heller decision, he said "they don't impede self-defense because they can be removed in a split-second."

I'd LOVE to see the court make HIM do it, "in a split-second". Talk about "America's Funniest Home Videos"...

 

[Zoogster]

I'd LOVE to see the court make HIM do it, "in a split-second". Talk about "America's Funniest Home Videos"...

Who wants to be the mock attacker attacking him with a pretend bludgeon while he fumbles with the lock? That would demonstrate it perfectly.

Put a mock gun with lock on the table, put the trigger lock key in his pocket and start someone on the other side of the courtroom with a mock soft bludgeon like a pillow.
And go!
Could you smack him all over the courtroom before he could unlock and fire?

I got a better idea, lets put it in a safe with a trigger lock and unloaded!
The ideal Brady storage method! (Oh wait that would probably be at a local police armory.)

I think you could continue to smack him with that mock bludgeon in such a way that he would never ever get the thing removed from the safe, with the lock off and loaded.
Then ask the jury what would have happened if it had been a real bludgeon.

 

[Igloodude]

Oooh, yeah, we could call it the "Fenty Drill"!!

(with apologies to Mr. Tuiller[sp?])

 

[Cougfan2]

Oooh, yeah, we could call it the "Fenty Drill"!!

LOL I would love a courtroom demonstration of how many rounds a home invader could cap off at him while he was trying to get the lock off. Not literally of course.

 

[Igloodude]

Of course, to be more realistic, they'd have to turn the lights in the courtroom way down prior to the demonstration.

 

[RNDMEVIL]

Didn't GW Bush only appoint 1 of the current justices? If so, then how does Frankie explain the votes of the other 4? Interesting how when a judge pulls something out of thin air, "progressives" call it a good ruling, but when a ruling is made based on 200 years, and hundreds of pages of writing, it's "extremist activism"

Bush appointed both Roberts and Alito. Both good choices in my opinion.

 

[shdwfx]

This highlights another key issue: executive enforcement.

Without a president and AG willing to enforce the Supreme Courts' Heller decision, it's worth as much as a common restraining order. Should a future President tacitly agree with the D.C. ban, he could easily ignore or delay to perform his duty.

 

[Deanimator]

Should a future President tacitly agree with the D.C. ban, he could easily ignore or delay to perform his duty.

I've got one word for you: "I M P E A C H M E N T"

 

[Igloodude]

One wonders how Harriet Miers would have voted...

 

[shdwfx]

I've got one word for you: "I M P E A C H M E N T"

Yes, but that is highly unlikely given the makeup of congress right now.

No matter, the fight for rights confirmed by the Heller decision is just begun. We are on offense now, but the war is a long way from won - if ever.

 

[ProguninTN]

Well, yeah, but the "military" didn't just decide to get involved. Enforcement of the law is the job of the Executive Branch. And President Eisenhower decided the military had to be used. But you have your facts a little sideways. The Gov of Arkansas called out the Ark NG to STOP the black students. It was Eisenhower's outrage at that action that led to his decision to send in the 101st Airborne!

Yes, enforcement was dependent on the executive branch, but the NG worked with the 101st. Initially, Gov. Faubus tried using the guard as an obstacle, but then the President took over the NG.

the President ordered the 101st Airborne Division of the United States Army to Little Rock and federalized the entire 10,000 member Arkansas National Guard, taking it out of the hands of Governor Faubus

 

[CaptMac]

DC Code

DC LAw (DC CODE) is actually pretty interesting reading they have much different legal Definitions than Federal Law and "most" states, I have attached part of the legal definitions describing firearms under DC Code, I would urge each of you to look up the code and read it.

DC ST § 22-4501

Formerly cited as DC ST 1981 § 22-3201

District of Columbia Official Code 2001 Edition Currentness
Division IV. Criminal Law and Procedure and Prisoners.

Title 22. Criminal Offenses and Penalties. (Refs & Annos)

Subtitle VI. Regulation and Possession of Weapons.

Chapter 45. Weapons and Possession of Weapons. (Refs & Annos)

§ 22-4501. Definitions.


a) "Pistol," as used in this chapter, means any firearm with a barrel less than 12 inches in length.


(b) "Sawed-off shotgun," as used in this chapter, means any shotgun with a barrel less than 20 inches in length.


(c) "Machine gun," as used in this chapter, means any firearm which shoots automatically or semiautomatically more than 12 shots without reloading.


(d) "Person," as used in this chapter, includes individual, firm, association, or corporation.


(e) "Sell" and "purchase" and the various derivatives of such words, as used in this chapter, shall be construed to include letting on hire, giving, lending, borrowing, and otherwise transferring.


(f) "Crime of violence" as used in this chapter have the same meaning as provided in § 23-1331(4).


(g) "Dangerous crime," as used in this chapter, means distribution of or possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance. For the purposes of this definition, the term "controlled substance" means any substance defined as such in the District of Columbia Official Code or any Act of Congress.

That just a small part of the weapons section.

 

[I'm Thinking...]

"Sawed-off shotgun,"

I was under the impression that the minimum legal length of a shotgun barrel was 18 inches (to be on the safe side, as it were, perhaps that is why many shotguns at 18" are now being advertised as being 18.5").

 

[pyle]

I am guessing that Fenty et al will find out rather quickly that the Justices don't have much of a sense of humor when politicians try to circumvent their rulings.

No doubt there. That is one thing the SCOTUS Justices don't tolerate - regardless of which side they might fall on the ruling.....

 

[CaptMac]

Thats what I mean I'm Thinking, DC law is much different than what most all of us are used to. Their definitions are much different and more restrictive than most, hell I wouldn't live there on a bet. Only place on the planet I know of where semiautomatics that can fire more than 12 rounds without reloading is classified as a machinegun, its not Federal law its DC law.

"I was under the impression that the minimum legal length of a shotgun barrel was 18 inches (to be on the safe side, as it were, perhaps that is why many shotguns at 18" are now being advertised as being 18.5"). "

 

[Triphammer]

Isn't the BATF's job to enforce firearms law? Isn't what Fenty is attemping a greater violation than accepting a "Y" for a "yes" on a 4473?

Send ATF.