Heller v. D.C - it's on AGAIN!

[Cavalier Knight]

Monday, July 28, 2008

In open defiance of the Supreme Court's decision striking down the Washington D.C. gun control law, the City Council passed an"emergency" law that keeps in place almost all of the law that was ruled unconstitutional.

For example, though the Court ruled specifically that the city's ban on handguns violated the Second Amendment, most handguns still cannot be registered because D.C. bureaucrats classify semi-automatic pistols as "machine guns."

Even Dick Heller, who brought the case against Washington's gun ban, was rejected when he tried to register his handgun because any"bottom loading" firearm is a "machine gun" according to the D.C.police.

Similarly, while the Court found that "the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a "trigger lock" is unconstitutional, the city kept in place the "lock up your safety" law unless the resident is in immediate danger.

The D.C. Council is thus rendering the Supreme Court victory for gun rights meaningless, while leaving residents defenseless.

Congress needs to repeal the District's gun control law to ensure that the Supreme Court decision is not a hollow victory.

According to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress has the authority and responsibility to govern the District. It can simply repeal the District's onerous gun law.

Not surprisingly, however, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has no intention of allowing the D.C. gun ban repeal legislation to come to the floor, even though it is cosponsored by more than half of the members of Congress.

To free the bill from the Speaker's death grip, Representative Mark Souder (R-IN) has filed a discharge petition to bring the bill directly to the floor. Rep. Souder needs 218 cosigners for the petition to be successful. There are currently 109 signers.

There are not many days left in this legislative session, so it is vital that the discharge petition moves quickly. Please contact your representative and urge him or her to support the repeal of the D.C. gun ban and to sign the Souder discharge petition. You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Reps. the pre-written e-mail message below.

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Representative,

The Washington, D.C. city council is making a mockery of the recent Supreme Court decision supporting the individual right to keep and bear arms.

Though the Court ruled the city's handgun ban unconstitutional, DC is still making it illegal to own most handguns. The Court also ruled that the District's gun lock and gun storage law violates the Constitution, but under the city's new "emergency" gun law, firearms must be kept inoperable unless there is an immediate danger to residents.

Representative Mark Souder has filed a discharge petition to bring a billto repeal the District's gun laws to the floor for a vote.

Please stand up for the Second Amendment and sign the Souder discharge petition.

Sincerely,

*******************************************************

Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place
Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

 

[jgullock]

Yup, it's Heller v. D.C AGAIN!!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,392705,00.html

Gun Ban Plaintiff Dick Heller Files New Lawsuit Against Washington, D.C.
Monday, July 28, 2008

E-Mail Print Share:

WASHINGTON — The plaintiff in the Supreme Court case that overturned Washington's 32-year-old handgun ban has filed a new federal lawsuit against the city.

In a complaint filed Monday in U.S. District Court, Dick Heller and two other plaintiffs allege that the city's new gun regulations still violate rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

The lawsuit cites the District of Columbia's unusual ban on firearms that carry more than 12 rounds of ammunition, which includes most semiautomatic handguns.

The suit also claims that the city's regulations make it all but impossible for residents to keep a gun ready for immediate self defense in the home.

The Supreme Court struck down Washington's handgun ban June 26. The D.C. Council passed emergency legislation July 15 in an effort to comply with the court's ruling.

 

[ashtxsniper]

Give em hell and dont let off.

 

[ilbob]

I corrected it.

The Supreme Court struck down Washington's handgun ban June 26. The D.C. Council passed emergency legislation July 15 in an effort to avoid having to comply with the court's ruling.

 

[Sam Adams]

Is it truly a new suit, or is it some kind of "please make them do what you said for them to do" suit that will move through the system much more quickly?

 

[MaterDei]

Give em Heller!

 

[guntotinguy]

Stick to your guns...at least its a good idea.Maybe the good people in DC needs to vote OUT those politicians who wish them to be 'victims'.

 

[Robert Hairless]

No big deal. Adrian Fenty and the District Council drew such big attention last time that they've been scheduled for a new series this season.

Get your peanuts, popcorn, and beverages here. Hot dogs and souvenir programs are in the lobby.

 

[hill billy]

oh. hell. yes. Get em' Dick.

 

[Dead]

Wow... Go Heller!

Now where did I put my popcorn? This is going to be better than Dark Knight

 

[Zoogster]

The lawsuit cites the District of Columbia's unusual ban on firearms that can carry more than 12 rounds of ammunition, which includes all semiautomatic handguns.

Fixed the errors.

 

[Dan Forrester]

Who’s paying for this? The money can’t be coming out of Heller’s own pocket; so where’s it coming form.

Dan

 

[Thernlund]

Who’s paying for this? The money can’t be coming out of Heller’s own pocket; so where’s it coming from.

Gura is working pro-bono.

Or maybe you mean DC's side? Tax dollars at work buddy.


-T.


EDIT: As it happens, Gura doesn't appear to be involved in this one. The representing counsel appears to be Stephen P. Halbrook and Richard E. Gardiner.

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/0728heller.pdf

So as to the "who's paying" question, I don't know.


EDIT2: Thinking about it, there's probably no shortage of attorneys falling all over themselves to be apart of this case.

 

[XD_fan]

This is still a keeping an arm case. Just extending the scrutiny over keeping an arm in DC. DC had the golden opportunity to nip this all in the bud. Nope, they had to enact an even more heinous ordinance than they already had.

After listening to the CCoC speech that Gura gave I thought this would be a slow, little increments battle. Now it looks like there is going to be some real precedence set very soon.

 

[kludge]

40. The Act amended D.C. Code § 7-2502.03 to add: “(d) The Chief shall require any
registered pistol to be submitted for a ballistics identification procedure and shall establish a fee for
such procedure.” No limit is placed upon the amount of the fee.
41. The above requires payment of a fee, the amount of which is left to the boundless
discretion of the Chief of Police, in order to register, and hence lawfully to possess a pistol.
Predicating the right lawfully to possess a pistol as guaranteed by the Second Amendment on the
payment of any fee, and moreso an undefined fee with no limit according to the arbitrary will of the
Chief, infringes on the right of the people, including plaintiffs herein, to keep and bear arms.

Brilliant.

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

.


So what kind of time frame are we looking at this getting to court?



And what kind of time frame are we looking this being decided and enforced?



.

 

[Thernlund]

90 days (+/-) on getting to court would be my informed guess. 7 to 10 days max for a verdict. 30 to 45 days following a verdict for implementation.

If it loses and goes to appeal, that can start the whole thing over. Finally, you get back to SCOTUS. They'd likely refer it back to the lower court.


-T.

 

[Sam Adams]

Predicating the right lawfully to possess a pistol as guaranteed by the Second Amendment on the payment of ANY fee, and moreso an undefined fee with no limit according to the arbitrary will of the Chief, infringes on the right of the people, including plaintiffs herein, to keep and bear arms. [Emphasis Added]

I believe that this is a FAR bigger case than anyone now suspects. As emphasized above (by me), this case is going after fees - ALL fees - charged for the "privilege" (as viewed by the Fenty/Daley/Sarah Brady types) of keeping a firearm (which is actually a "RIGHT" as the Supreme Court recently stated).

I believe that there will be a monumental decision by the Court, backed up by the 1943 Murdoch v. Pennsylvania decision (see http://nesara.org/court_summaries/murdoch_v_pennsylvania.htm ), which stated words to the effect that a

license tax was, “a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution. Thus, it may not exact a license tax for the privilege of carrying on interstate commerce, although it may tax the property used in, or the income derived from, that commerce, so long as those taxes are not discriminatory… The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down.

IOW, I believe that after this case is resolved, you'll not have any license fees (other than perhaps rather nominal expense-reimbursement type fees) to purchase, continue to own or to carry firearms. We may even be able to say goodbye to the 1934 NFA fee of $200 per full auto!!

BTW, note that Murdoch applied against Pennsylvania. Well, OK, the 1st had by then been at least partially incorporated. The 2nd may well be incorporated by the time this case is decided (maybe just a few days, weeks or months beforehand), or this case may (in conjunction with Heller's strong individual rights language) incorporate the 2nd.

As I said, this case will be MONUMENTAL!

 

[ChrisVV]

I wasnt aware that I had a machine gun... Actually i have like 3 machine guns. AWESOME!

 

[Thernlund]

I said it before... DC v. Heller was but a foundation upon which new case law will be built.

Those who said Heller did nothing were only partially correct. It did not uproot gun control over night. That much is true. But it did open the door in that direction. Now we must walk through the door and open the next.


-T.

 

[Sam Adams]

I wasnt aware that I had a machine gun... Actually i have like 3 machine guns. AWESOME!

Actually, I'd love it if the Supreme Court would adopt the DC definition of "machine gun" and, citing its absurdity and the requirements of the 2nd that the militia have arms, overturn both the '86 machine gun ban and the '34 NFA restrictions on full autos.

Yeah, I know, "...and then you wake up." Yes, it is a dream, and one that WON'T occur with this particular case (though the NFA fee may go buh-bye). We'll have to wait for another time for that - and I'd be satisfied with ONLY a revocation of the '86 ban. As much as it'd irk me, I'll gladly pay a $200 tax to buy full autos, so long as I (and everyone else) can buy as many as manufacturers can make.

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

90 days (+/-) on getting to court would be my informed guess. 7 to 10 days max for a verdict. 30 to 45 days following a verdict for implementation.

If it loses and goes to appeal, that can start the whole thing over. Finally, you get back to SCOTUS. They'd likely refer it back to the lower court.


-T.

Thanks. I hope the lower court decides in our favor, however, you never know these days, just like a 5-4 decision.


.

 

[redneckrepairs]

Thank god for Heller and his " team " . I dont honestly belive that DC will again appeal what the circuit court has to say , but i do belive they will attempt to violate the nomenclature and spirit of Heller VS DC any way they can . Any steps Mr Heller and his legal team can take only benefits us when the incorporation issue pops up in another suit . Thank you Mr Heller be you a man who wants to feel safe at home , or be you a man who intends to stand for the rights of all . No matter your intent you are a hero for many of us that shows just how a person can work within the system .

I know heller or his advocates read this board , and frankly i would like my opinion to get back to him . Furthermore if he wants a vacation out in the badlands of Colorado he is welcome on my place , and fox news is welcome back in town lol .

 

[Deus Machina]

I'm going to play the pessimist here...

First time around, it was a narrow win, and it was quoted that the 2A wasn't "to be completely unregulated", just not thoroughly shoved in the closet.

With such a narrow win, a couple of the floppers in that group may thing that the new restrictions are perfectly logical (you'll never hear me accuse a politician of the same, mind you), and knock down the new case, in which the entire thing could be a setback of varying degrees.

But if they do pass this, it will be a great step forward.

 

[Thernlund]

I'm convinced that Fenty is our secret agent behind enemy lines, covertly sabotaging the enemy.

Somebody should take up a collection and send him a custom 1911 commemorative.


-T.