Utah Guns Forum banner

Firearms ban in DC struck down

4K views 12 replies 8 participants last post by  UtahJarhead 
#1 ·
http://www.examiner.com/article/firearm ... k-down-d-c

"In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny," Senior Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. wrote in a Memorandum-Decision Order signed Thursday and filed today.

"Having reviewed the parties' submissions and the applicable law ... the Court here by GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and DENIES Defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment," Judge Scullin wrote, further ordering "that Defendants ... are permanently enjoined from enforcing D .C. Code ... to ban registration of handguns to be carried in public for self- defense by law-a biding citizens."
Interestingly, I believe this decision effectively makes DC a Constitutional Carry place.
 
#3 ·
#4 ·
I'm definitely looking forward to seeing how this pans out in further litigation. At least the good law-abiding folks who live in DC will finally be able to protect themselves in that crime-ridden cesspool of a city. Clearly, as in all other instances of arming good people, I'm sure the crime rate will plummet. Having visited DC many times throughout my life since I grew up in CT, I remember fearing for my life if I took a wrong turn away from the touristy parts. I sure hope it becomes fully overturned!
 
#6 ·
I'm waiting to hear specifics on things like, which firearm may be carried. I'm guessing it would need to be in DC's approved firearm list. Be less than 10 rounds, etc. Who knows. If we can get a few more details, and this lasts longer than a few days, maybe I can make a trip to DC mid August.
 
#7 ·
I had an interesting, but likely irrelevant thought this afternoon. What happens to the 2010 credit bill that gave us National Park carry? Is that now a moot point at this point?
 
#8 ·
UtahJarhead said:
I had an interesting, but likely irrelevant thought this afternoon. What happens to the 2010 credit bill that gave us National Park carry? Is that now a moot point at this point?
National Park carry is a federal, nation-wide law. The DC decision only affects DC, all 68 square miles of it.
 
#9 ·
Doctor Jenks said:
Emily Miller this morning on Fox news..

The guy in this talking about specific national security issues that make DC different in regards to legal citizen carry has got it all wrong. Because of the same reasons we should have more armed citizens rather than less.

If they have to honor the concealed or open carry rights of any state then I wonder how long until we see open carry demonstrations in DC

Also if there are no laws in place regarding carry in specific locations like businesses and such does than mean you can carry anywhere that is not already on the federal list for place you can't carry. Since the entire place was off limits before this how many businesses would actually have no firearms signs and if they did is there a law that makes it enforceable.
 
#10 ·
Car Knocker said:
UtahJarhead said:
I had an interesting, but likely irrelevant thought this afternoon. What happens to the 2010 credit bill that gave us National Park carry? Is that now a moot point at this point?
National Park carry is a federal, nation-wide law. The DC decision only affects DC, all 68 square miles of it.
It stands to reason that it extends to all publicly accessible federal lands where firearms are banned. After all, that was the scope of Heller as well, no?
 
#11 ·
UtahJarhead said:
It stands to reason that it extends to all publicly accessible federal lands where firearms are banned. After all, that was the scope of Heller as well, no?
I'm pretty sure Heller extended only to DC. I don't recall it including National Parks or other federally controlled, publicly accessible lands. But I am very open to correction.

I believe there remain legal differences between DC and National Parks. The feds have explicit, constitutional language giving them exclusive jurisdiction over DC. I think there is still some degree of shared jurisdiction in National Parks.

It would be nice to have a ruling in favor of shall-issue or even constitutional carry apply to all national parks regardless of the State in which the parks are hosted. And that might even be one more nice step to what we really need which is some kind of nationwide recognition of carry permits or constitutional carry with a minimum standard of where, how, and what guns/ammo can be legally carried.

The downside of this battle taking so long is that we are denied our rights in much of the nation while it plays out.

The upside is that by taking a long, deliberate course, we increase the odds of a favorable court ruling for our side. Thirty years ago shall issue was all but unheard of and carrying a gun for self-defense was very rare in most of the nation. Today it is common and we have solid evidence that it doesn't lead to problems. The last few years of allowing carrying in National Parks in accordance with State laws has demonstrated that doesn't cause problems. With so many NPS sites in and around the greater DC area and with favorable carry laws in Virginia we have evidence that locations near DC do not defy the experience seen in other States.

So while the wait has been and remains painful, I think we are in much better shape than if Heller had been heard a decade sooner.

My only real fear with the wait is that with the '84 ban on new full auto guns, those may be getting more rare as time goes on. Hard for something to be in common use if it has been outlawed for 30 years. Even there, the interest in suppressors seems to be growing.

Charles
 
#12 ·
UtahJarhead said:
Car Knocker said:
UtahJarhead said:
I had an interesting, but likely irrelevant thought this afternoon. What happens to the 2010 credit bill that gave us National Park carry? Is that now a moot point at this point?
National Park carry is a federal, nation-wide law. The DC decision only affects DC, all 68 square miles of it.
It stands to reason that it extends to all publicly accessible federal lands where firearms are banned. After all, that was the scope of Heller as well, no?
Heller was a USSC decision. The DC decision was a District Court decision and that court has no jurisdiction outside of DC. It's a jurisdiction issue and District Courts have the least amount of geographic jurisdiction in the federal court system. If the DC decision is appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit , no matter which way the appellate decision goes, it will only set binding precedent within the District of Columbia Circuit, although it may be used as persuasive precedent in other jurisdictions.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top