A Federal judge has just overturned the Federal ban on handgun carry in the District of Columbia: https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2009cv1482-51 .

Rockstar Second Amendment attorney Alan Gura and the Second Amendment Foundation have scored another major victory.   Here is Washington writer Emily Miller’s take: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/27/emily-miller-federal-judge-rules-dc-ban-on-gun-carry-rights-unconstitutional/ .

The DC police chief has reportedly ordered officers not to arrest gun carriers who have legitimate permits from other jurisdictions at this time, which would have the effect of legalizing carry with permits from elsewhere but not for DC residents, who have none. Some folks interpret the ruling as “Constitutional Carry” which encompasses DC residents whose handguns are registered in the District as per local law.  However, a lawyer friend of mine close to the situation offers this cautious advice:  “Obviously, I do *not* recommend carrying or possessing a firearm in D.C. until this matter is fully litigated, unless such carrying or possession would be legal under the law as it previously stood; it is likely that the decision will be promptly stayed once an appeal is filed.”

Discussion invited.

92 COMMENTS

  1. Interesting….. I have gone to “Police Week” for the last two years, and have been told, and seen, that open carry was ok, as long as you had your badge visible, and credentials handy in case you were stopped. This was very different, I thought, since the last time I was in DC thee was no question that even though I was a fully credentialed Deputy Sheriff, I could not have a firearm in my possesion. I didn’t even try then (’95).

    It should cut down on some of the crime there…..

  2. Interesting….. I have gone to “Police Week” for the last two years, and have been told, and seen, that open carry was ok, as long as you had your badge visible, and credentials handy in case you were stopped. This was very different, I thought, since the last time I was in DC thee was no question that even though I was a fully credentialed Deputy Sheriff, I could not have a firearm in my possesion. I didn’t even try then (’95).

    It should cut down on some of the crime there…..

  3. Anyone have a copy of the DC Chief’s order? The exact wording of such things is important, and often lost amid the bewildered.

    Per the ruling, a “reciprocity” order would still be in violation. The judge was very clear on _no_ restrictions save for normal federal limits (adjudicated felons/insane/traitors/etc). DC Chief is drawing a target for an easy lawsuit with a big payout.

  4. Anyone have a copy of the DC Chief’s order? The exact wording of such things is important, and often lost amid the bewildered.

    Per the ruling, a “reciprocity” order would still be in violation. The judge was very clear on _no_ restrictions save for normal federal limits (adjudicated felons/insane/traitors/etc). DC Chief is drawing a target for an easy lawsuit with a big payout.

  5. I’m sure the lawyers on each side are peeing their pants right now, but I hope it is a step in the right direction.

  6. I’m sure the lawyers on each side are peeing their pants right now, but I hope it is a step in the right direction.

  7. I can see a scenario where their is no immediate appeal of this ruling, rather a lot of foot dragging on the part of politicians in implementing carry permitting.
    The last thing the anti-constitution folks want is another Supreme Court ruling affirming the 2nd Amendment as an individual, inalienable right.
    Rather, I believe they will take as much time as the judge will tolerate to put together as restrictive a permitting process as possible, all the time hoping that in the near future the balance of ideology on the high court will shift in their favor.
    I’ve said it before and I will say it again, when casting a vote for President, their likely choices for Supreme Court justices should be one of, if not the top consideration.

  8. I can see a scenario where their is no immediate appeal of this ruling, rather a lot of foot dragging on the part of politicians in implementing carry permitting.
    The last thing the anti-constitution folks want is another Supreme Court ruling affirming the 2nd Amendment as an individual, inalienable right.
    Rather, I believe they will take as much time as the judge will tolerate to put together as restrictive a permitting process as possible, all the time hoping that in the near future the balance of ideology on the high court will shift in their favor.
    I’ve said it before and I will say it again, when casting a vote for President, their likely choices for Supreme Court justices should be one of, if not the top consideration.

  11. Certainly sounds like a step in the right direction.

    Too bad I have enough to D.C., to last me for the rest of this Life time, not to mention the TSA gropings, at every airport we have traveled, this after carrying firearms on aircraft, for over thirty years, with only my Badge, and Credentials, with no incidents, or problems?

  12. Certainly sounds like a step in the right direction.

    Too bad I have enough to D.C., to last me for the rest of this Life time, not to mention the TSA gropings, at every airport we have traveled, this after carrying firearms on aircraft, for over thirty years, with only my Badge, and Credentials, with no incidents, or problems?

  15. I never thought I would live to see the days of concealed carry allowed in Metro DC area easpecially open carry. Now to all who live there please do so responsibly as this right could be lost. I am proud of all involved here seeing this through.

  16. I never thought I would live to see the days of concealed carry allowed in Metro DC area easpecially open carry. Now to all who live there please do so responsibly as this right could be lost. I am proud of all involved here seeing this through.

  22. Per the Washington Times, this is the Chief’s order:
    Scenarios
    You stop a man on the street carrying a firearm and:
    Scenario 1: The man says he is a resident of the District, but the gun is unregistered.
    You should charge him with Unregistered Firearm.
    Scenario 2: The man lives in Vermont, which does not require a license or permit for either open or concealed carry of a handgun. You run his name, and no criminal record is apparent.
    You should record any relevant information for potential further investigation, and he is free to leave.
    Scenario 3: The man lives in Virginia, where no license or permit is required to openly carry a handgun. However, when you run his name, records indicate that he is a convicted felon.
    Under District and federal law, felons may not legally possess a firearm. You should arrest him for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm.
    — From teletype issued to officers by Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier

    Attorney General Nathan has asked for a 180 day stay to allow time for appeal or the development of a licensing mechanism. We can count on the appeal happening. Based on Emily Miller’s experiences in “merely” obtaining a purchase permit and registration, DC does not have the talent or the will necessary to put a licensing mechanism in place even if given years to do so.

  23. Per the Washington Times, this is the Chief’s order:
    Scenarios
    You stop a man on the street carrying a firearm and:
    Scenario 1: The man says he is a resident of the District, but the gun is unregistered.
    You should charge him with Unregistered Firearm.
    Scenario 2: The man lives in Vermont, which does not require a license or permit for either open or concealed carry of a handgun. You run his name, and no criminal record is apparent.
    You should record any relevant information for potential further investigation, and he is free to leave.
    Scenario 3: The man lives in Virginia, where no license or permit is required to openly carry a handgun. However, when you run his name, records indicate that he is a convicted felon.
    Under District and federal law, felons may not legally possess a firearm. You should arrest him for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm.
    — From teletype issued to officers by Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier

    Attorney General Nathan has asked for a 180 day stay to allow time for appeal or the development of a licensing mechanism. We can count on the appeal happening. Based on Emily Miller’s experiences in “merely” obtaining a purchase permit and registration, DC does not have the talent or the will necessary to put a licensing mechanism in place even if given years to do so.

  28. So you win in court and yet …you still lose your god given rights guaranteed by the Constitution that many still do not honor…….when laws are not upheld and enforced..you have a democracy … as many from CONgress and the presidents past and present seem to continue to call this REPUBLIC , which by the way is ONLY true when the rule of law is obeyed….so I guess those that have worked so hard to get their termology correct as in a ‘democracy’ have refuse to follow the law…..imho

  29. So you win in court and yet …you still lose your god given rights guaranteed by the Constitution that many still do not honor…….when laws are not upheld and enforced..you have a democracy … as many from CONgress and the presidents past and present seem to continue to call this REPUBLIC , which by the way is ONLY true when the rule of law is obeyed….so I guess those that have worked so hard to get their termology correct as in a ‘democracy’ have refuse to follow the law…..imho

  30. Until just recently our 2nd Amendment rights were seriously in question but we’ve made big strides.
    Take a look at the losses we are suffering in our other rights. It is becoming scary. I hope my fellow gun enthusiasts do not lose sight of the other ones. If you lose the 1st Amendment protections you will lose the 2nd. They’re all critically important.

  31. Until just recently our 2nd Amendment rights were seriously in question but we’ve made big strides.
    Take a look at the losses we are suffering in our other rights. It is becoming scary. I hope my fellow gun enthusiasts do not lose sight of the other ones. If you lose the 1st Amendment protections you will lose the 2nd. They’re all critically important.

  32. Oh no! The once crime free streets of Washington D.C. will now run red with the blood of a million or more bullet riddled bodies, brutally mowed down by the crazed vast right wing conspiracy gun owners whose only goal is to take innocent lives, especially those of the peace loving Democrats and liberals.

    I would not trust the D.C. police chief’s words further than I could toss him.

  33. Oh no! The once crime free streets of Washington D.C. will now run red with the blood of a million or more bullet riddled bodies, brutally mowed down by the crazed vast right wing conspiracy gun owners whose only goal is to take innocent lives, especially those of the peace loving Democrats and liberals.

    I would not trust the D.C. police chief’s words further than I could toss him.

  34. First Illinois and now D.C.? That sure explains the hellish winter we just went through. Next thing you know we’ll hear the following words uttered just before everything goes black….

    CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN THE WORLD SERIES!!!!

  35. First Illinois and now D.C.? That sure explains the hellish winter we just went through. Next thing you know we’ll hear the following words uttered just before everything goes black….

    CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN THE WORLD SERIES!!!!

  39. This is good news but laws are only as good as the the people’s will to fallow and uphold them.This Judge has made the correct decision but the question remains is, will the political hacks that run D.C. respect this decision and uphold the law?Law abiding citizens should not even need a permit to carry a gun,period.You get an FBI background check and that should be it,you carry, period! That should be the end of the matter!
    Another thing that irritates me no end is the fact that people accept the fact that appointments to the upper court can some how change the Constitution.
    The Second Amendment issue has been decided and even if the court becomes stacked with liberals that cannot change the Constitution or a past decision by that court.The court has stated that the right to keep and bear arms is and individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and that is that,period. That should never change no matter how the political atmosphere of the court changes one way or another. The Constitution says what it says and that is that.-Floyd Smith

  40. This is good news but laws are only as good as the the people’s will to fallow and uphold them.This Judge has made the correct decision but the question remains is, will the political hacks that run D.C. respect this decision and uphold the law?Law abiding citizens should not even need a permit to carry a gun,period.You get an FBI background check and that should be it,you carry, period! That should be the end of the matter!
    Another thing that irritates me no end is the fact that people accept the fact that appointments to the upper court can some how change the Constitution.
    The Second Amendment issue has been decided and even if the court becomes stacked with liberals that cannot change the Constitution or a past decision by that court.The court has stated that the right to keep and bear arms is and individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and that is that,period. That should never change no matter how the political atmosphere of the court changes one way or another. The Constitution says what it says and that is that.-Floyd Smith

  41. This is good news but laws are only as good as the the people’s will to fallow and uphold them.This Judge has made the correct decision but the question remains is, will the political hacks that run D.C. respect this decision and uphold the law?Law abiding citizens should not even need a permit to carry a gun,period.You get an FBI background check and that should be it,you carry, period! That should be the end of the matter!
    Another thing that irritates me no end is the fact that people accept the fact that appointments to the upper court can some how change the Constitution.
    The Second Amendment issue has been decided and even if the court becomes stacked with liberals that cannot change the Constitution or a past decision by that court.The court has stated that the right to keep and bear arms is and individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and that is that,period. That should never change no matter how the political atmosphere of the court changes one way or another. The Constitution says what it says and that is that.-Floyd Smith

  42. The “reciprocity” approach is still in gross violation of the ruling:

    “ORDERS that Defendants [etc.] from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) against individuals based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District of Columbia.”

    The PD memo makes clear people ARE to be prosecuted under that law wherever conceivable, and unequally, based on their non-DC-resident status. The DC memo is also setting up a “contempt” situation by basically saying “ok, you can carry – but you can’t register anything to carry, so the ruling is moot for DC residents”.

  43. The “reciprocity” approach is still in gross violation of the ruling:

    “ORDERS that Defendants [etc.] from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) against individuals based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District of Columbia.”

    The PD memo makes clear people ARE to be prosecuted under that law wherever conceivable, and unequally, based on their non-DC-resident status. The DC memo is also setting up a “contempt” situation by basically saying “ok, you can carry – but you can’t register anything to carry, so the ruling is moot for DC residents”.

  44. The “reciprocity” approach is still in gross violation of the ruling:

    “ORDERS that Defendants [etc.] from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) against individuals based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District of Columbia.”

    The PD memo makes clear people ARE to be prosecuted under that law wherever conceivable, and unequally, based on their non-DC-resident status. The DC memo is also setting up a “contempt” situation by basically saying “ok, you can carry – but you can’t register anything to carry, so the ruling is moot for DC residents”.

  45. Floyd Smith,
    “The Second Amendment issue has been decided and even if the court becomes stacked with liberals that cannot change the Constitution or a past decision by that court.The court has stated that the right to keep and bear arms is and individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and that is that,period. That should never change no matter how the political atmosphere of the court changes one way or another. The Constitution says what it says and that is that.-Floyd Smith”
    The Supreme’s evidently are not as reticent to reverse decisions by prior Supreme Court justices as you seem to believe

    .http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CONAN-2002/pdf/GPO-CONAN-2002-12.pdf

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_U.S._Supreme_Court_decisions

  46. Floyd Smith,
    “The Second Amendment issue has been decided and even if the court becomes stacked with liberals that cannot change the Constitution or a past decision by that court.The court has stated that the right to keep and bear arms is and individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and that is that,period. That should never change no matter how the political atmosphere of the court changes one way or another. The Constitution says what it says and that is that.-Floyd Smith”
    The Supreme’s evidently are not as reticent to reverse decisions by prior Supreme Court justices as you seem to believe

    .http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CONAN-2002/pdf/GPO-CONAN-2002-12.pdf

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_U.S._Supreme_Court_decisions

  47. Floyd Smith,
    “The Second Amendment issue has been decided and even if the court becomes stacked with liberals that cannot change the Constitution or a past decision by that court.The court has stated that the right to keep and bear arms is and individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and that is that,period. That should never change no matter how the political atmosphere of the court changes one way or another. The Constitution says what it says and that is that.-Floyd Smith”
    The Supreme’s evidently are not as reticent to reverse decisions by prior Supreme Court justices as you seem to believe

    .http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CONAN-2002/pdf/GPO-CONAN-2002-12.pdf

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_U.S._Supreme_Court_decisions

  48. Oh Lordy !! Mas, you just have to run your intro class in the Distict now ! Please schedule one pronto ! That would be sooo cool. LOL

  49. Oh Lordy !! Mas, you just have to run your intro class in the Distict now ! Please schedule one pronto ! That would be sooo cool. LOL

  50. Oh Lordy !! Mas, you just have to run your intro class in the Distict now ! Please schedule one pronto ! That would be sooo cool. LOL

Newer Comments »

Comments are closed.