• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Gun Ban Lifted In D.C.!!!!!!!!!!

Mike

Well-known member
Quite another victory against the Leftist Dems like OT.


Victory in Palmer v. D.C.

Posted on July 26, 2014 by alangura


Justice never sleeps…. not even on a Saturday afternoon, when this opinion was just handed down.


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. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District.

In 2012, I won Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933 (7th Cir. 2012), which struck down Illinois total ban on the carrying of defensive handguns outside the home. With this decision in Palmer, the nation’s last explicit ban of the right to bear arms has bitten the dust. Obviously, the carrying of handguns for self-defense can be regulated. Exactly how is a topic of severe and serious debate, and courts should enforce constitutional limitations on such regulation should the government opt to regulate. But totally banning a right literally spelled out in the Bill of Rights isn’t going to fly. My deepest thanks to the Second Amendment Foundation for making this victory possible and to my clients for hanging in there. Congratulations Americans, your capital is not a constitution-free zone.

Alan Gura was the attorney in the case as was he in Heller vs D.C.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Quite another victory against the Leftist Dems like OT.


Victory in Palmer v. D.C.

Posted on July 26, 2014 by alangura


Justice never sleeps…. not even on a Saturday afternoon, when this opinion was just handed down.


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. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District.

In 2012, I won Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933 (7th Cir. 2012), which struck down Illinois total ban on the carrying of defensive handguns outside the home. With this decision in Palmer, the nation’s last explicit ban of the right to bear arms has bitten the dust. Obviously, the carrying of handguns for self-defense can be regulated. Exactly how is a topic of severe and serious debate, and courts should enforce constitutional limitations on such regulation should the government opt to regulate. But totally banning a right literally spelled out in the Bill of Rights isn’t going to fly. My deepest thanks to the Second Amendment Foundation for making this victory possible and to my clients for hanging in there. Congratulations Americans, your capital is not a constitution-free zone.

Alan Gura was the attorney in the case as was he in Heller vs D.C.

And another falsehood (LIE) put forward by the KKK Grand Cajone of the Week types... :roll:

I've long been a supporter of a persons right to carry- and the carrying of concealed weapons... And I went one step further than the Grand Cajone-- and instead of being like him just flapping his mouth- I actually issued hundreds of CCW's to the good folk that needed them....

But I'm beginning to understand that as southerners who want to stir KKK/Skinhead/Sovereigns to anarchy and bring about another civil war to take us back to the 1850 laws- they have to LIE so bad about normal folks to stir Hate and Fear ... :roll: :( :x
 

hopalong

Well-known member
oldtimer wrote

I actually issued hundreds of CCW's to the good folk that needed them....

All of this in a county with a population of 6500 :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

Mike

Well-known member
OT forgets his posts about why anyone wants to carry an AR and sides with the liberals on that.

He is one hell of an example to call someone else a liar. Heck, he even tried to say the wild west days set precedence on concealed or open carry. :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
OT forgets his posts about why anyone wants to carry an AR and sides with the liberals on that.

He is one hell of an example to call someone else a liar. Heck, he even tried to say the wild west days set precedence on concealed or open carry. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Bullpuckey- the majority of the country think that those walking the streets packing AR's and AK's are nutcases trying to screw up the law for those legal carriers... While I agree they have the right- I don't see the need nor the reasoning behind it....

As far as the wild west days-- many towns did set a precedent by requiring gun checks when folks came to town. Most historians agree there were more gun laws- and less rights afforded folks to pack a gun 100-150 years ago... One whole race was banned:

Not just the Old West, but the Old South was a poster area for selective gun law enforcement, especially when uppity n*gg*rs were involved.


Even the Old West had gun control


By Mark S. Mellman - 04/17/13 12:22 AM EDT

Growing up, one of my favorite bumper stickers claimed “The West wasn’t won with a registered gun.” I never agreed with those promoting this viewpoint, so my admiration must have been fueled by some combination of adolescent macho, love of the “old West” (and the movie “How The West Was Won”), appreciation for the rhyme and admiration for the talent of the slogan writers.

Many years later I learned the sloganeers were not telling the whole truth: in fact, the West was won when guns were confiscated. In many frontier cities, the law required those entering town to turn their guns over to the sheriff. In the Dodge City of 1879, a large billboard announced to residents and visitors alike “The Carrying of Firearms Strictly Prohibited.” Communities from Juneau to Wichita adopted similarly restrictive gun laws.


Tombstone’s infamous “Gunfight at the empty lot near Fremont Street” — later dubbed the “Gunfight at the OK Corral,” which was nearby, for marketing reasons — developed precisely because the Earp brothers were trying to enforce the law against carrying firearms in town, which the Clantons were flouting. (Of course, sex, pride, politics and money were all implicated too. But the law against carrying weapons was the proximate cause.)

There were no polls then, so there is no way to be certain how citizens reacted to those laws, but there were no lobbies working to overturn them, no organizations mobilizing gun owners, no popular revolt against those who passed or enforced gun safety laws. Indeed, they seemed pretty popular. The first law promulgated by the good people of Dodge City banned the carrying of concealed weapons.


How things have changed. Eighty years after the OK Corral/Fremont Street fracas, in 1959, 60 percent of Americans favored a ban on pistols and revolvers, while only 36 percent wanted citizens to be able to holster such weapons. By last year, just 24 percent favored and 74 percent opposed a ban on handguns.


Partly as a result, today no one is seriously contemplating such a move. But there are several gun control measures that have enjoyed, and continue to enjoy, widespread public support.


Among the most widely supported measures is the background-check provision featured in the Senate bill currently under discussion. Since January, at least 16 national surveys, conducted by nine different pollsters, have asked Americans, in slightly different ways, about their views on background checks for all gun buyers. Support for background checks has ranged from 85 percent to 92 percent. There are very few issues on which 90 percent of Americans agree. Opposition to background checks is about equal to the number who think Elvis is still alive; many more Americans claim to have seen ghosts than oppose background checks.


Moreover, support cuts across partisan lines. In the CBS/New York Times poll, 86 percent of Republicans, 89 percent of independents and 96 percent of Democrats favored background checks for “all potential gun buyers.” Quinnipiac found 89 percent of Republicans, 92 percent of independents and 96 percent of Democrats all supporting “background checks for all gun buyers.”


Finally, it’s worth noting that support for background checks has been consistent. The longest time series on this question seems to belong to the ABC/Washington Post poll, which found 89 percent of Americans favoring background checks after the Columbine massacre in 1999, 92 percent support in 2000, and 86 percent support last week.


My guess is that residents of the Old West would have favored them too. But it is certainly true that very few issues have commanded this level of unanimity over so long a period. There is no doubt that a Congress that does not pass universal background checks for gun buyers is not representing the American people.

Mellman is president of The Mellman Group and has worked for Democratic candidates and causes since 1982. Current clients include the majority leader of the Senate and the Democratic whip in the House.
.

Read more: http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/mark-mellman/294353-even-the-old-west-had-gun-control#ixzz38d2vrKuA
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Just because you think I should throw all common sense out the door and allow anyone and everyone ( convicted felons, mentally ill, 10 year old kids, etc. ) to buy or own any kind of firearm (Ma Deuce 50 Caliber machine gun, Uzi, RPG, etc) does not mean that I am anti- firearms... Thinking rationally has not yet became a crime...
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 28614
Location: Northeast Montana

PostPosted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:43 pm Post subject: Reply with quote



Sandhusker wrote:

badaxemoo wrote:

Sandhusker wrote:

badaxemoo wrote:
Try to do a little research before you wet yourself.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/nra_targets_obama.html


This refutes my posts how?


Armor piercing ammunition?


What about it?


badax- some will never see their hands when they're right in front of their faces...

I used to be a member of the NRA- and remember when most law enforcement were big NRA supporters--but then when they took the path of the radical right and began opposing even law enforcement proposed regulations- like banning assault rifles or banning armor piercing ammunition - they lost me and most law enforcement agencies...The same as what has happened to the Republican Party with its pandering to the extremist right as its "base"...They've lost much of their former law enforcement support....

Sure looks like you were pushing the "Assault Weapons Ban" to me. :lol: :lol:

Will you ever learn to quit lying? :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Oldtimer
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 28614
Location: Northeast Montana

PostPosted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:43 pm Post subject: Reply with quote



Sandhusker wrote:

badaxemoo wrote:

Sandhusker wrote:

badaxemoo wrote:
Try to do a little research before you wet yourself.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/nra_targets_obama.html


This refutes my posts how?


Armor piercing ammunition?


What about it?


badax- some will never see their hands when they're right in front of their faces...

I used to be a member of the NRA- and remember when most law enforcement were big NRA supporters--but then when they took the path of the radical right and began opposing even law enforcement proposed regulations- like banning assault rifles or banning armor piercing ammunition - they lost me and most law enforcement agencies...The same as what has happened to the Republican Party with its pandering to the extremist right as its "base"...They've lost much of their former law enforcement support....

Sure looks like you were pushing the "Assault Weapons Ban" to me. :lol: :lol:

Will you ever learn to quit lying? :lol: :lol:

I don't believe every Tom, Dick, and Harry needs to be packing an assault rifle... Just like the polls I posted- the majority of the country does not want to turn the US into looking like Baghdad...And the only animal I'm aware of that you hunt inside of a APC or wearing body armor that you would need armor piercing ammo for is man...That should be reserved for our military and police...

I hear everyone complaining about the police looking more militaristic - a complaint I've echoed too-- BUT in defense of law enforcement this did not occur until we had the 1986 shootout of the FBI Agents in Florida-- the North Hollywood shootout and many more incidents where the law enforcement were so heavily outgunned by the bad guys that they took heavy casualties... By more heavily arming the bad guys-- our law enforcement have been forced to look like (body armor, helmets, etc.) and act like the military (APC's, assault weapons, high magazine capacity pistols instead of the old revolvers, utilizing military tactics for building takedowns and dangerous arrests, etc)...
Its a catch-22 that came about with all the newer military type weaponry on the market....
Where does the ever snowballing cycle end ?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Federal prosecutors brought a total of 5,082 gun violation cases in 2013 recommended by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, compared with 6,791 during the last year of George W. Bush’s presidency in 2008, according to data obtained from the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/23/despite-rhetoric-gun-prosecutions-plummet-under-ob/#ixzz38hKs1IjU
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I don't believe every Tom, Dick, and Harry needs to be packing an assault rifle... Just like the polls I posted- the majority of the country does not want to turn the US into looking like Baghdad...And the only animal I'm aware of that you hunt inside of a APC or wearing body armor that you would need armor piercing ammo for is man...That should be reserved for our military and police...

I hear everyone complaining about the police looking more militaristic - a complaint I've echoed too-- BUT in defense of law enforcement this did not occur until we had the 1986 shootout of the FBI Agents in Florida-- the North Hollywood shootout and many more incidents where the law enforcement were so heavily outgunned by the bad guys that they took heavy casualties... By more heavily arming the bad guys-- our law enforcement have been forced to look like (body armor, helmets, etc.) and act like the military (APC's, assault weapons, high magazine capacity pistols instead of the old revolvers, utilizing military tactics for building takedowns and dangerous arrests, etc)...
Its a catch-22 that came about with all the newer military type weaponry on the market....
Where does the ever snowballing cycle end?

This all reminds me of the old Aesop Fable:

The Wind and the Sun

THE WIND and the Sun were disputing which was the stronger. Suddenly they saw a traveller coming down the road, and the Sun said: “I see a way to decide our dispute. Whichever of us can cause that traveller to take off his cloak shall be regarded as the stronger You begin.” So the Sun retired behind a cloud, and the Wind began to blow as hard as it could upon the traveller. But the harder he blew the more closely did the traveller wrap his cloak round him, till at last the Wind had to give up in despair. Then the Sun came out and shone in all his glory upon the traveller, who soon found it too hot to walk with his cloak on.

“KINDNESS EFFECTS MORE THAN SEVERITY.”

Society is going at the problem all wrong. Instead of seeing if the bad guys or the good guys can pack the biggest guns, we need to instead get back to basics. The family unit should be preserved, with a mother and a father both having positive influence on their offspring. Honesty, integrity, and hard work should be rewarded, instead of allowing greed and corruption to set the standards of our leaders. Crime should not pay. We need to get back to the values of fifty years ago, when the good guys still won. Government should only have the authority that was set up by our Constitution, and not be allowed to overstep this authority. This wonderful country was founded on God-given Christian principles. This is the reason it prospered and was blessed for so long. Now God is being left out of the classroom, the court room, and all other aspects of United States society. He is not only "left out," but He has been "kicked out." When we quit loving, respecting, and worshipping God, He chooses to reciprocate by withholding blessings from us.

The Liberals have pretty well gained control of the classrooms these days. They have the edge, because they are indoctrinating our youth while they are still young and impressionable. The Good Guys need to try much harder to counteract and show a positive influence every chance they get. Hopefully with kindness, respect, and honest dealings, our country can again become the great country that it used to be.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Just because you think I should throw all common sense out the door and allow anyone and everyone ( convicted felons, mentally ill, 10 year old kids, etc. ) to buy or own any kind of firearm (Ma Deuce 50 Caliber machine gun, Uzi, RPG, etc) does not mean that I am anti- firearms... Thinking rationally has not yet became a crime...

Just where did anyone say that? Remember if you don't verify that you once again proved that you are a liar
 

Mike

Well-known member
Let's see............

1- I called OT out for being a Liberal progressive gun snatcher.

2- He called me a liar because he has issued gun permits.

3- I showed him a statement by him where he was for the Assault Weapon Ban.

Typical conversation with him. It never ends. :???: :???: :???:

I'll never get it.......... :roll:
 

Steve

Well-known member
The assault weapons ban is just a way liberals can ban guns.. cause they "look" scarey..

once they have an assault rifle ban,.. they go after other "scarey" features like magazines that hold more then six cartridges..

now it is pump action shotguns.. cause they look real scarey when the movie bad guy pumps it with one hand
A Rule of Cool way of chambering a shotgun. After firing, the wielder lets go of the trigger and holds the gun vertically by the forward grip in his other hand. He then jerks the gun sharply upward, letting its inertia and weight work the pump, then levels the gun and fires again.

Alternatively, it can be done prior to a fire fight, as part of a Lock And Load montage.

Attempting this in real life is possible, but it's very difficult to do, puts a lot of unnecessary strain on the gun's moving parts, and is rather unsafe, as a considerable amount of force is required to rack the slide. It's very possible to lose your grip and send a now-loaded firearm flying across the room.

it never ends.. if a Hollywood bad guy can do it.. it must be banned.

soon it will be lever action rifles..

so Liberals where do you draw your line?

at the humble bow and arrow.. or how about a BB gun and slingshot..

both are banned in NJ

does anyone believe a gun should be banned just because it looks scarey? because that is all the assault weapon ban is..
 
Top