The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: ericire12 on July 29, 2008, 08:16:52 PM
-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/29/heller-others-challenge-semi-automatic-ban/
Three D.C. residents backed by one of the country's most influential pro-gun organizations Monday filed a challenge to the District's ban on semi-automatic handguns. The plaintiffs said city officials are flouting a recent Supreme Court decision that struck down the city's 32-year-old gun ban.
Lead attorney Stephen P. Halbrook and the National Rifle Association, which is financing the case, say the District's definition of a machine gun is too vague and unfairly prohibits residents from using the guns for home defense.
"D.C. has stuck to its position that semi-automatic guns are machine guns," Mr. Halbrook said. "It's a crazy definition of machine gun."
The plaintiffs in the case, filed in U.S. District Court, include Dick Anthony Heller, the respondent in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller that addressed the city's ban.
The others are Amy McVey, the first D.C. resident to register a handgun after the ban was struck down, and Absalom F. Jordan Jordan Jr., a plaintiff in Seegars v. Ashcroft. The case challenged the Justice Department on the gun ban at about the time Mr. Heller was involved with the lower court Parker v. District case in 2003.
Gun rights advocates pounced immediately on the District's law against semi-automatic handguns after the June 26 ruling by the Supreme Court.
The city's law defines a machine gun as "any firearm which shoots automatically or semiautomatically more than 12 shots without reloading."
The definition prohibits the majority of semi-automatic handguns regardless of how many rounds they are designed to hold because they can theoretically hold modified higher-capacity magazines.
Gun advocates say the District should revise the definition to use wording closer to the federal definition of a machine gun, which requires a gun to be capable of firing more than one shot with a single trigger pull.
D.C. interim Attorney General Peter J. Nickles said he expected the lawsuit but thinks the District's definition of a machine gun is acceptable and intends to fight the challenge.
"I don't think you can satisfy the Heller folks unless you have a law or regulation that says you can keep a loaded handgun in your home at all times," he said.
NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanadam said restrictions on handguns leave residents at a disadvantage and will not prevent crime.
"The biggest losers are the law-abiding residents of the District of Columbia," he said. "The laws are not going to stop the criminals."
D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson, at-large Democrat, introduced bare-bones emergency legislation July 1 to outline the District's new rules on registering handguns. The council passed a heftier, updated version July 15, and gun registration began two days later. That bill is in effect for 90 days while the council works on permanent legislation.
Mendelson spokesman Jason Shedlock said Mr. Mendelson reviewed the complaint and intends to address concerns about the District's gun laws when the council returns from recess in September. However, he still has the option to convene a special session of the council's public-safety committee.
"It raises a number of important points that he wants to address quickly over the next few months," Mr. Shedlock said. "The emergency legislation was not meant to be comprehensive. It was meant as a stopgap."
The plaintiffs are also challenging the rule that allows the chief of police to set the cost of registration, which Mr. Halbrook says improperly gives the chief power over who is allowed to exercise their Second Amendment right.
The complaint also challenges the District's safe-storage provisions that require handguns to be disassembled or trigger locked and unloaded until they are being used against a "threat of immediate harm." Gun advocacy groups say the provision leaves residents susceptible to attack while they are trying to prepare their weapons.
-
And so it continues ::)
-
The NRA is ferocious right now. This could have even more impact for the rest of us, if the courts have to start looking at just what Heller means. YEAH!
-
On a different thread I stated that laws and court decisions mean nothing to liberals if they do not like them. We know this is true. If the people in power can pick and choose what laws and decisions they follow then what good are those laws and decisions?....does someone else have to answer that for you or will you use your head?
Why do some people start bragging that the war is won when, in fact, it is not over.
It is a childish fantasy to believe some law or decision now has you covered. The fight is on...
If you believe you are now somehow protected because of a law or decision you are not using your head. The people in power will still do what they want if their bluff is not called. Just because a battle was won the war is not over...get up before you die.
We are dealing with lying liberal fascist leaders that need to be stopped. And you need to help. Support the NRA or some other 2nd Ammendment organization today. Shooting ranges and local bubba gun clubs don't really count...dig deep and get the fishhooks out of your pockets. We need to meet the challenge straight-on, heads up, and right now!
-
NH has article 10 in its State constitution. The right of the people to use armed force to remove corrupt or oppressive government.In other words we can LEGALLY drag them out of office at gun point ;D
-
NH has article 10 in its State constitution. The right of the people to use armed force to remove corrupt or oppressive government.In other words we can LEGALLY drag them out of office at gun point ;D
Does it include a definition of corrupt and what process in followed to declare them corrupt?
I love the sound of that provision but wonder if it can be used effectively?
Looking up the article now.
-
NH Constitution Article 10
Article 10. Right of Revolution
New Hampshire is the only state besides Kentucky which provides for a "Right of Revolution" in its state constitution. The Right of Revolution is a right dating back to the Revolutionary War, and is held in high regard in New Hampshire by members of the libertarian Free State Project. Part I., Article 10 reads:
“ Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind."
A lot os "zen" in there.... I'd imagine any action would require the cooperation of the State Police and National Guard...but if it was as bad as it would have to be for the article to apply, they probably would assist...at least the rand and file would.
-
NH Constitution Article 10
Article 10. Right of Revolution
New Hampshire is the only state besides Kentucky which provides for a "Right of Revolution" in its state constitution. The Right of Revolution is a right dating back to the Revolutionary War, and is held in high regard in New Hampshire by members of the libertarian Free State Project. Part I., Article 10 reads:
“ Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind."
A lot os "zen" in there.... I'd imagine any action would require the cooperation of the State Police and National Guard...but if it was as bad as it would have to be for the article to apply, they probably would assist...at least the rand and file would.
I imagine you would need to be able to point to specific articles and clauses of State and federal Constitutions that had been violated, not just that we are being taken over by a bunch of stinking liberals to defend that action.
-
New Hampshire is the only state besides Kentucky which provides for a "Right of Revolution" in its state constitution.
Ahhh... sometimes its good to be a "hillbilly". ;D
Swoop
-
Scuse me, but I seem to remember a "machinegun" being a fully automatic weapon that fires RIFLE rounds. At worst, a weapon that fires handgun cartridges would be a "SUB-machinegun", and then must be FULLY automatic, at that!
What a bunch of flippin' idiots in that town!!
-
Ahhh... sometimes its good to be a "hillbilly". ;D
Swoop
Or a "Damnyankee" ;D
Scuse me, but I seem to remember a "machinegun" being a fully automatic weapon that fires RIFLE rounds. At worst, a weapon that fires handgun cartridges would be a "SUB-machinegun", and then must be FULLY automatic, at that!
What a bunch of flippin' idiots in that town!!
The collection of geniuses in DC is why Congresses approval rating is only 1/3 as high as Pres. Bush.
-
The collection of geniuses in DC is why Congresses approval rating is only 1/3 as high as Pres. Bush.
which is really sad when you look at bush's approval rating.
Back to the OP
I see a new line added what is and is not a machine gun coming... hopefully that will be a good thing.
If we would only remove the LEO exemptions from all gun control laws, stupid crap like this DC law would go away.
-
The collection of geniuses in DC is why Congresses approval rating is only 1/3 as high as Pres. Bush.
[/quote]
My Drill Instructors at PI used to say that 10% never get the word. Meaning that 10% of people are idiots. a 9% approval rating means that not even all the IDIOTS approve of congress.
-
The collection of geniuses in DC is why Congresses approval rating is only 1/3 as high as Pres. Bush.
My Drill Instructors at PI used to say that 10% never get the word. Meaning that 10% of people are idiots. a 9% approval rating means that not even all the IDIOTS approve of congress.
BRILLIANT observation!! lmao
-
It saddens me to think that the D.C. Officials would rather keep "testing their luck" like a child and WASTE tax money and time to defend thier twisted vision of gun rights. I recently sent an email to my local Democratic Representitive during the Heller case and did not recieve a responce until almost a month later. The reply was clearly sent to many people and sounded like a robot stateing how she was there to protect our "Heritage" and "Shooting sports." Not once was it ever mentioned that we had a RIGHT to possess arms but rather made it seem as though it was a so called "Privelage" like a Driver's License or my CCH. I responded and asked her views on the decision and her personal beliefs and got THE SAME email. My response was simple; I asked why there werent resticions put on vehichles with LARGE fuel capacities and a FAST rate of acceleration as we have one of the highways (I-70) with one of the nations highest fatal accident rates. There has been no response yet. I will prob. get the same email I have recieved twice from her office. This just shows me that ignorance truly is a disese which needs to be cured soon. I'll be damned if I live in a "New England."
-
It saddens me to think that the D.C. Officials would rather keep "testing their luck" like a child and WASTE tax money and time to defend thier twisted vision of gun rights. I recently sent an email to my local Democratic Representitive during the Heller case and did not recieve a responce until almost a month later. The reply was clearly sent to many people and sounded like a robot stateing how she was there to protect our "Heritage" and "Shooting sports." Not once was it ever mentioned that we had a RIGHT to possess arms but rather made it seem as though it was a so called "Privelage" like a Driver's License or my CCH. I responded and asked her views on the decision and her personal beliefs and got THE SAME email. My response was simple; I asked why there werent resticions put on vehichles with LARGE fuel capacities and a FAST rate of acceleration as we have one of the highways (I-70) with one of the nations highest fatal accident rates. There has been no response yet. I will prob. get the same email I have recieved twice from her office. This just shows me that ignorance truly is a disese which needs to be cured soon. I'll be damned if I live in a "New England."
I understand your reference is to English gun law, but could you (ALL) PLEASE phrase it differently ;D I do live in New England, (as opposed to Olde England where most of the original European settlers came from) and I find it necessary to point out that Me. NH and Vt. have the least restrictive firearms laws in the Nation, as well as some of the lowest crime rates. The places that infringe on our second amendment rights are the ones influenced by the Boston/ NY metroplex, outside that area support for gun rights is alive and well.
-
I understand your reference is to English gun law, but could you (ALL) PLEASE phrase it differently ;D I do live in New England, (as opposed to Olde England where most of the original European settlers came from) and I find it necessary to point out that Me. NH and Vt. have the least restrictive firearms laws in the Nation, as well as some of the lowest crime rates. The places that infringe on our second amendment rights are the ones influenced by the Boston/ NY metroplex, outside that area support for gun rights is alive and well.
With the noted exception of parts of the Chicagoland area of Illinois (State Motto: Vote early, vote often!)
-
I think we will find that "Gun Control" is driven by Big City dem political "machines" while smaller cities and towns even in the same state take a far less repressive view but are over ruled. Pennsylvania makes a good example as it is primarily a PRO gun rights state with all anti gun initiatives originating with the scofflaw administration of Philadelphia.
-
I think we will find that "Gun Control" is driven by Big City dem political "machines" while smaller cities and towns even in the same state take a far less repressive view but are over ruled. Pennsylvania makes a good example as it is primarily a PRO gun rights state with all anti gun initiatives originating with the scofflaw administration of Philadelphia.
Pretty much so. In the not so big state of New Mexico, our Democratic Governor, high profile, publicly states his support for the Second Amendment. The State is mainly Democratic but not restrictive in gun rights.
From where I live, it seems like restrictive regulations come from large cities with left-wing liberals with lots of power.
-
.............From where I live, it seems like restrictive regulations come from large cities with left-wing liberals with lots of power.
Great observation.
Bill Richardson, by the way, is a card toting concealed carry guv.