Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,627 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
GIVE'EM HELL HELLER!!!!!!!!.......

http://www.newsmax.com/us/washington_gun_ban/2008/07/28/117034.html

Lawsuit Filed Against New DC Gun Regulations

Monday, July 28, 2008 5:00 PM


WASHINGTON -- The plaintiff in the Supreme Court case that struck down Washington's 32-year-old handgun ban filed a new federal lawsuit Monday, alleging the city's new gun regulations still violate an individual's right to own a gun for self-defense.

Dick Heller and two other plaintiffs argue that the city's regulations are "highly unusual and unreasonable" in the complaint filed in U.S. District Court.

The lawsuit claims the District of Columbia continues to violate the intent of the Supreme Court's June 26 decision by prohibiting the ownership of most semiautomatic weapons, requiring an "arbitrary" fee to register a firearm and establishing rules that make it all but impossible for residents to keep a gun in the home for immediate self-defense.

The D.C. Council was immediately criticized by gun rights advocates when it unanimously passed emergency gun legislation July 15. The law will remain in effect for 90 days, and the council expects to begin work in September on permanent legislation.

The regulations maintain the city's ban of machine guns, defined in the law as weapons that shoot more than 12 rounds without reloading. That definition applies to most semiautomatic firearms.

Handguns, as well as other legal firearms such as rifles and shotguns, also must be kept unloaded and disassembled, or equipped with trigger locks in the home unless there is a "reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm."

"A robber basically has to make an appointment" for a resident to be able to prepare the weapon for use, Heller's attorney, Stephen Halbrook, said Monday. Halbrook also called the city's definition of machine guns "bizarre."

"The District's ban on semiautomatic handguns amounts to a prohibition of an entire class of arms that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society for the lawful purpose of self defense in the home," the lawsuit alleges.

D.C. interim Attorney General Peter Nickles said the suit came as no surprise and that he expects a long legal fight as the issue makes it way through the courts.

"I think there's a fundamental disagreement with the intent of the Supreme Court's decision," said Nickles, noting that the Supreme Court's ruling did not give officials much guidance with respect to regulating firearms.

"I feel comfortable with what the city has done," Nickles said.

After the Supreme Court narrowly struck down Washington's handgun ban last month in a narrow 5-4 decision, the D.C. Council quickly moved to comply with the ruling, and residents were allowed to begin applying for handguns July 17 for the first time since 1976.

Monday's lawsuit alleges that Heller initially tried to register a semiautomatic Colt pistol, but was denied because D.C. police considered the weapon to be a machine gun.

Besides Heller, the other plaintiffs are Absalom Jordan, whose application to register a .22-caliber pistol was denied, and Amy McVey, who must return to D.C. police headquarters two more times to register her weapon after being photographed and fingerprinted and undergoing a background check, according to the lawsuit.

Washington's gun ban essentially outlawed private ownership of handguns in a city struggling with violence. But what impact the ban has had on crime has long been debated, particularly after homicides more than doubled during a crack epidemic in the late 1980s and early '90s.

The city's gun regulations remain among the strictest in the country under the new regulations, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
93,787 Posts
Yeah, heard that on the radio. By Dick Heller, surprise, surprise. Over the refusal to register semi-auto pistols. I predict DC will lose, hopefully quickly, and (also hopefully) will get slapped down, hard, in the process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
When did direct contravention of a ruling by the Supreme Court ever stop being illegal? When the highest court in the land tells you that one of your laws is unConstitutional, doesn't that equate as an immediate "cease and desist" order? Honestly, D.C.'s got some balls doing what they're doing, and in my eyes that means treason...
 

·
Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member
Joined
·
58,935 Posts
DC is just testing the limits of the SC decision and hoping that the makeup of the Court, under Obama, will change.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,627 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
GC is just testing the limits of the SC decision and hoping that the makeup of the Court, under Obama, will change.
You mean DC, right????.........:confused:
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
2,677 Posts
It is obvious that he is right. At least the city will have to pay for his attorney and court fees and should be liable for damages for willfully disregarding a SCOTUS decision.
 

·
Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member
Joined
·
58,935 Posts
I wonder how the Chicao suit is doing.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
93,787 Posts
Just getting started. And they are gonna have to get the court hearing it to accept that the incorporation Doctrine applies (it should, but since when has "should" always been what happened?).
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
36,346 Posts
EDITORIAL: Gun-ban lawsuit part deux

Thursday, July 31, 2008 Washington Times


Exactly two weeks ago, we told Mayor Adrian Fenty and the D.C. Council that the overbearing emergency legislation regulating gun purchases, registration and ownership they passed would face a lawsuit. The week before, we told them how to possibly avoid litigation. City Hall did not listen. Despite the Supreme Court ruling, the District remains onerous.

A lawsuit was filed Monday by Dick Heller, the very gun-rights advocate who challenged the city's strict handgun ban that led to the Supreme Court decision. The high court affirmed that citizens do indeed have the individual right to bear arms. In his latest suit, Mr. Heller is contending that the new D.C. regulations are "unreasonable and burdensome" for prospective gunowners. Mr. Heller argues, for example, that the city's classification that a machine gun is any weapon that shoots more than 12 rounds without reloading makes most semi-automatic pistols off limits and does not conform to the public's perception of what a machine gun is nor with the definition in any English language dictionary.

But there are other encroachments, including a provision that requires residents to keep their guns unloaded and disassembled in the home or equipped with a trigger lock. Worse is a provision that makes it impossible for residents to even register a newly purchased handgun: "The applicant takes his or her completed application to a licensed firearm dealer to take delivery of the pistol. If the dealer is outside the District, the dealer transports the pistol to a licensed dealer in the District to complete the transaction."

There are five federally licensed dealers in the District, including the Shakespeare Theatre Inc. Arena Stage and some others, but none are selling or transferring firearms. The facts regarding the how-to of registration are singularly ironic because one of them is anti-gun lobbyist Josh Sugarmann. He is the founder and executive director of the Violence Policy Center, a group dedicated to gun control. But he is neither selling nor transferring firearms. Mr. Sugarmann has devoted much of his life to ending gun violence and defending gun laws. (The policy center has even advocated guns be regulated as a public-health product.)

That D.C. residents have no D.C. option when it comes to purchasing and registering firearms is unacceptable and turns any measure of common sense and reasonableness on its head.

City Hall could easily spare the Violence Policy Center and the Shakespeare Theatre the hardship by striking the provision when it returns from summer recess. But that is as likely as Mayor Adrian Fenty testing the onerousness of his own bureaucracy and anti-gun logic by trying to buy and register a handgun. Indeed, the mayor is seemingly refusing to yield even to the Supreme Court when it comes to handgun rights. Mr. Fenty's response to the second lawsuit filed by Mr. Heller sounds as if the mayor was not even aware that the court had ruled in Mr. Heller's favor: "The Office of the Attorney General will vigorously defend the District's laws as reasonable regulations of firearms, and as the lawful action of the people's representatives, the Mayor and the Council."

The issue is not whether City Hall "will vigorously defend" the city's statutes. The issue is twofold: 1) why City Hall refuses to obey the Supreme Court; 2) and why City Hall is becoming so litigious. The coolest of heads are needed when litigation involves the Constitution.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,627 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
The SCOTUS needs to set some Precedence in this case and start arresting those who do not comply with the ruling......If they don't, they are gonna look like the UN....worthless and ineffective.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
93,787 Posts
"The issue is not whether City Hall "will vigorously defend" the city's statutes. The issue is twofold: 1) why City Hall refuses to obey the Supreme Court; 2) and why City Hall is becoming so litigious. The coolest of heads are needed when litigation involves the Constitution." says the newspaper.

I respond (1) because they don't want to and figure they might get away with it because (2) they expect B, Hussein Obama, crypto-Muslim Chicago/"Crook" County boodler and enemy of RKBA to be elected and appoint judges who are like unto himself. They figure by being litigious they can keep things in the air until the Magic Mulatto saves them. They might even be right, though I'd suggest probably not.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top