Post by: Nitrogen on July 17, 2008, 10:50:19 AM
I hope the district ends up back in court very quickly here. This is getting really stupid.
Quote
WASHINGTON (WUSA) -- District residents can start registering their guns today. But at least one very high profile application was already rejected.
Dick Heller is the man who brought the lawsuit against the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns. He was among the first in line Thursday morning to apply for a handgun permit.
But when he tried to register his semi-automatic weapon, he says he was rejected. He says his gun has seven bullet clip. Heller says the City Council legislation allows weapons with fewer than eleven bullets in the clip. A spokesman for the DC Police says the gun was a bottom-loading weapon, and according to their interpretation, all bottom-loading guns are outlawed because they are grouped with machine guns.
Besides obtaining paperwork to buy new handguns, residents also can register firearms they've had illegally under a 180-day amnesty period.
Though residents will be allowed to begin applying for handgun permits, city officials have said the entire process could take weeks or months.
http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=74036&catid=158Dick Heller is the man who brought the lawsuit against the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns. He was among the first in line Thursday morning to apply for a handgun permit.
But when he tried to register his semi-automatic weapon, he says he was rejected. He says his gun has seven bullet clip. Heller says the City Council legislation allows weapons with fewer than eleven bullets in the clip. A spokesman for the DC Police says the gun was a bottom-loading weapon, and according to their interpretation, all bottom-loading guns are outlawed because they are grouped with machine guns.
Besides obtaining paperwork to buy new handguns, residents also can register firearms they've had illegally under a 180-day amnesty period.
Though residents will be allowed to begin applying for handgun permits, city officials have said the entire process could take weeks or months.
Post by: Scout26 on July 17, 2008, 11:17:34 AM
Post by: agricola on July 17, 2008, 11:26:37 AM
Post by: StopTheGrays on July 17, 2008, 11:33:33 AM
Post by: Lennyjoe on July 17, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
Post by: The Annoyed Man on July 17, 2008, 12:34:46 PM
P90's are also legal then?
Calico's should be OK as well then. Same with old Mauser pistols. And some of the AR-15's for sale in California without a detachable magazine.
Post by: seeker_two on July 17, 2008, 01:04:47 PM
Post by: Regolith on July 17, 2008, 02:02:17 PM
What would it take to get a contempt citation from SCOTUS?.....
I don't know, but it looks like DC is trying to find out.
Edit: This might actually be a good thing. If DC pisses off the supremes enough, we might just get a 9-0 ruling enforcing the Heller ruling. And it may come along with a greater expansion of the right. In other words, while Heller set precedent, DC dickering around may just make SCotUS etch that ruling into stone.
Post by: nico on July 17, 2008, 02:46:26 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 17, 2008, 07:06:35 PM
This might actually be a good thing. If DC pisses off the supremes enough, we might just get a 9-0 ruling enforcing the Heller ruling. And it may come along with a greater expansion of the right. In other words, while Heller set precedent, DC dickering around may just make SCotUS etch that ruling into stone.
That's what Heller and his counsel were hoping for when they went down there. Shouldn't go back to SCOTUS, though. I believe the two lower courts ruled in Heller's favor, so they would be expected to do so again.
I admit though, I'm just repeating what I read on THR.
What no one seems to be commenting on (in the threads I've looked at) are the insane storage rules, and that they seem to very clearly conflict with Scalia's talk of carrying guns in one's home.
Post by: wmenorr67 on July 17, 2008, 08:32:33 PM
Post by: m1911owner on July 17, 2008, 08:45:45 PM
Is the whole DC council on crack? This could prove very interesting. The fact being that SCOTUS is in recess until October so what would be the procedure for SCOTUS getting together and slapping a hand or two?
I highly doubt that there is anything about this case that is urgent enough to recall the Justices from their recess. If anything is going to happen anytime soon, it will have to happen at the district or appeals court levels.
Post by: m1911owner on July 17, 2008, 08:49:20 PM
What no one seems to be commenting on (in the threads I've looked at) are the insane storage rules, and that they seem to very clearly conflict with Scalia's talk of carrying guns in one's home.
Other than getting cited or arrested for "illegal storage conditions", I don't know how one would get standing to sue about this issue.
Post by: m1911owner on July 17, 2008, 09:03:14 PM
Apparently Mr. Heller attempted to register what DC considers a "Machine Gun."
Despite all the hand-wringing here and on THR about the "machine gun" designation, I think that's a red herring. The District has chosen to define guns that meet a certain set of characteristics to be in a category that they have chosen to call "machine guns." Governmental bodies do this all the time--creating definitions for words that have different meanings within the scope of their particular law than what they mean in common English. It would make no difference to anything if they had chosen to call that category "ham sandwiches." "Mr. Heller, you cannot register that gun because it is a 'ham sandwich'." It's the same difference.
The real issue at hand is that the Supreme Court held that they can't ban any class of commonly-used firearm. (At least I think that was "holding" and not "dicta.") The M1911A1 is the quintessential "commonly-used firearm"; it matters not whether you call it a "semi-automatic pistol," a "ham sandwich," or a "machine gun." As such, it is clearly in the range of weapons that the USSC had in mind when it ordered the District to register Mr. Heller's gun.
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 17, 2008, 09:06:34 PM
Dicta is a plural, IIRC.
Post by: m1911owner on July 17, 2008, 09:14:44 PM
It cannot be 'dicta'.
Dicta is a plural, IIRC.
Dicta is a plural, IIRC.
OK, I have a subject-verb mismatch in that sentence. Would you like this better?: "At least I think those remarks were part of the 'holdings' and not part of the 'dicta.'"
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 17, 2008, 09:29:53 PM
Post by: S. Williamson on July 18, 2008, 03:40:52 AM
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 18, 2008, 08:37:59 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on July 18, 2008, 08:40:16 AM
Post by: John G on July 18, 2008, 10:02:00 AM
Dictum?
...I hardly knew 'em!
Post by: seeker_two on July 18, 2008, 10:51:03 AM
Dictum?
Nope....but I did shake his hand once.....
Blast you, John G.....ya beat me to the punchline....
Post by: RevDisk on July 18, 2008, 01:21:54 PM
Is the whole DC council on crack? This could prove very interesting. The fact being that SCOTUS is in recess until October so what would be the procedure for SCOTUS getting together and slapping a hand or two?
Na, a lower court will do so.
If they were smart as they are evil, they'd have approved his handgun by waiver and denied all others. Instead, they directly violated the SCOTUS ruling. Not smart. Still evil, but not smart.
Post by: doczinn on July 18, 2008, 01:33:01 PM
Post by: The Annoyed Man on July 18, 2008, 04:01:44 PM
What would it take to get a contempt citation from SCOTUS?.....
Not as much as it would take to enforce it.
Call me a pessimist; I cannot expect an abused system to be able to correct itself.
Post by: RevDisk on July 18, 2008, 05:59:16 PM
What would it take to get a contempt citation from SCOTUS?.....
Not as much as it would take to enforce it.
Call me a pessimist; I cannot expect an abused system to be able to correct itself.
One would ignore the Supreme Court at their own peril... They can send Marshalls at a minimum, and the weight of their judgements reach far.
Post by: yesitsloaded on July 18, 2008, 06:10:35 PM
Post by: alan2 on July 20, 2008, 12:09:23 PM
Seems to me that those clowns really need to be dragged over the judicial coals, this time cited for contempt of court, with suitable, spelled significant penalties imposed on those responsible for this ongoing foolishness..
Post by: macpherson on July 21, 2008, 07:32:21 PM
Quote
One would ignore the Supreme Court at their own peril... They can send Marshalls at a minimum, and the weight of their judgements reach far.
I'm less convinced of that. This is going to get knocked down in court, but it's been obvious from the start that DC has been doing as much lawyering with the SCOTUS ruling as they can. They will make the law as restrictive as legally possible without going over the line into blatant disregard for the ruling. It's disgusting, but they are basically toeing the line on how far they can break the law of the land without causing enough trouble to warrant a judicial smackdown. As much as we would like it, it would take a HUGE infraction for the DC officials to be publically punished the way they should be. As things stand right now, they are at least going through the motions of obeying the ruling, albeit with blatant disregard for its content, so the SCOTUS will almost certainly leave the smaller issues to be resolved in the lower courts. I have no doubt that these cases will be brought (and won) to obtain relief, but it will take more years of legal wrangling and thousands more dollars to get DC to comply with the ruling in its entirety...This case should be OVER, and the fact that they are pulling this crap and getting away with it is evidence of a broken system
Post by: m1911owner on July 21, 2008, 08:59:46 PM
... it will take... thousands more dollars to get DC to comply with the ruling in its entirety...
I seem to recall seeing that since Heller was a "civil rights violation," DC gets to pay lawers' fees to Levy, Gura & Co. Can anyone confirm that?
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 22, 2008, 05:43:04 PM
Since we know now that the 1911 is a machine gun, you might want to change your screen name. Lest the law come and drag you away.