D.C. Just Doesn't Get It

Discussion in 'News Articles' started by chevydeerhunter, Jul 15, 2008.

  1. chevydeerhunter

    chevydeerhunter Well-Known

    1,063
    0
    36
    Feb 23, 2008
    San Antonio
    The whole meaning of the Second Amendment is that we have the natural born right to bear arms. We shouldn't have to apply for a permit to keep a firearm in our homes.:mad:



    D.C. Council Allows Residents to Begin Applying for Handgun Permits

    Tuesday, July 15, 2008
    [​IMG]

    WASHINGTON — The District of Columbia Council approved new firearms legislation Tuesday that will allow residents to begin applying for handgun permits this week.

    The council's unanimous vote comes as officials try to comply with last month's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down the city's 32-year-old ban on handguns.

    The emergency legislation will allow handguns to be kept in the home if they are used only for self-defense and carry fewer than 12 rounds of ammunition.

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

    "This is not perfect legislation,"(No sh*t, Sherlock. This "legislation" defeats the purpose of having a firearm for protection. - Ray) said D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson, who worked with the mayor's office on the bill. "The first step is what we have before us today so that we maintain important provisions in our gun registration law while we continue look at how we can further refine our gun registration law."

    Gun rights groups, including the National Rifle Association, said at least some of the new regulations will likely be challenged.

    The emergency legislation will remain in effect for 90 days, and the council expects to begin work in September on permanent legislation.

    Though residents can begin applying for handgun permits this week, city officials have said the entire process could take weeks or months.

    "It depends on what your situation is — whether you owned the gun before or purchased it outside the District of Columbia," police Chief Cathy Lanier said.

    The process involves a written exam, proof of residency and good vision. Successful applicants must pay a registration fee and agree to fingerprinting and a criminal background check before obtaining a weapon.

    Even with Tuesday's vote, Washington's gun regulations will remain among the strictest in the country, said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

    He said Chicago, where it is illegal to possess or sell handguns, now has the toughest ordinance, though the city is facing a legal challenge following the Supreme Court ruling.

    It remains to be seen how much of the district's new regulations will withstand constitutional challenges, Helmke said, adding that it could take years for the courts to sort it all out.

    The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision June 26 that affirmed the right to have guns for self-defense "raised more questions than it's probably answered," Helmke said. "They haven't explained where you draw the line."
     


  2. BeNotAfraid

    BeNotAfraid Active Member

    208
    0
    16
    Jul 15, 2008
    Red River, Texas
    D.C= a real "spatial impairment" model....

    Nope...D.C. don't get it AND NEVER WILL!

    you got that whole whiny, "gimme-gimme" crowd in charge there.

    they have never tasted true freedom (and the tragedy is--never WANT to!) way too easy belly-achin and blaming their ills on everyone else but themselves.

    BOTTOM LINE: the crazy, commie-bent Libtards see the ALMIGHTY STATE as the one granting them their rights. thus, you have to get in line and beg them for your "rights" they ALLOW you.

    Our Founding Fathers believed that GOD ALMIGHTY is and was the true granter of all freedoms GIVEN TO AND ENJOYED BY ALL MEN. and that governments are instituted to preserve these rights and government powers are to be LIMITED. "...endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights...." Spatial orientation is: moral, spiritual, upward, ennobling, transcendant, eternal principles of what is right and true.

    Big "spatial" disorientation. D.C Gobmint sees themselves as the pinnacle, the "top 'o the heap" where you have to grovel to get your rights... Space and time always directed and oriented towards themselves/individuals, limited time, here and now, whatever some political hack says it is today; maybe tomorrow it will change.

    pitiful!

    picture is worth a 1,000 words: "Bible, Rifle & Morning Coffee" is what our Founding Fathers might have meant:
    [​IMG]
     
  3. Texas1911

    Texas1911 TGT Addict

    May 29, 2017
    Austin, TX
    That'd be a good radio show name. :rofl:
     
  4. LittleGun

    LittleGun Active Member

    291
    0
    16
    Jun 27, 2008
    Spring/Houston
    Before becoming a gun owner, I didn't think much about gun laws. I didn't perceive the huge battle going on about rights. As a new gun owner, it seems to me it is a battle of wills. Some people, who happen to have lots of control, hate guns. Because they hate them, they want everyone else to hate them too.

    On the other side are those who like to own, collect, and shoot guns. They have no problem if others don't share enthusiasm. They don't try for force anyone to become gun owners. By contrast, the people who hate guns are constantly seeking ways to force their view on everyone. This may be an over-simplification, but I'm a simple guy.

    I just thought of something amusing: The presidential candidate who can reduce the price of ammo will win the election.
     
  5. DopaVash

    DopaVash Member

    112
    0
    16
    Apr 23, 2008
    Kingwood, Tx
    I don't see how they'd get away with this, it's something that Heller specifically said was unconstitutional. They're just itching for congress to strip them of that power, which they just might do with H.R. 1331.
     
  6. SIG_Fiend

    SIG_Fiend Administrator TGT Supporter Admin

    7,260
    13
    38
    Feb 21, 2008
    Austin, TX
    That's the horrible and depressing thing about this whole "battle". Most people don't even realize that it's not even so much about guns as much as it's about protecting all of our constitutional rights. For me, and I'm sure most of us, the second amendment is just the most important of those rights as what good are any others if you can't even protect yourself? We've already seen our rights of free speech and rights against unreasonable search and seizure being whittled away lately.

    You know, I really do not understand this phenomenon. It seems no matter which government, where it is, no matter how nice or well intentioned it is, that citizens must remain ever vigilant in protecting their rights or they will invariably be consistently infringed on until they are taken away completely. I mean the United States was intentioned to be the one country where this doesn't happen, our checks and balances system yet another method of keeping things in check, and EVEN HERE, we are still at war for our rights every day of the friggin year. What's worse is many of our own citizens are against us out of their own short sighted ignorance. It really is a battle of the wills. I feel a bit better knowing that, generally, most gun owners are probably also strong-willed and aware whereas many non-gun/anti gun individuals are sometimes ignorant, naive, and feeble-minded. We have right on our side, that's for sure.
     
  7. SIG_Fiend

    SIG_Fiend Administrator TGT Supporter Admin

    7,260
    13
    38
    Feb 21, 2008
    Austin, TX
    I'm betting that they are just attempting to keep making us fight for it, make us waste time taking them to court, etc. Basically they won't give it up on their own so they are going to make us make the courts order them not to continue with whatever new regulation or law they come up with each week. Politicians like this are criminals pure and F'in simple. Out of all the people that get made examples of by judges during sentencing, I wish a judge would see fit to make an example out of those consistently infringing our rights. Wouldn't it be great if one of these fools was sentenced to 25 to life for endangering society with their blatant disregard for the constitution?
     
  8. LHB1

    LHB1 Active Member

    311
    0
    16
    Mar 4, 2008
    Houston
    I think D.C. gets it (2nd Amendment). They just don't want us to get them (guns). They are throwing up every roadblock they can think of to derail our rights.
     
  9. Kerbouchard

    Kerbouchard Member

    133
    0
    16
    Jun 18, 2008
    Dallas
    If D.C. 'got it', they would not have had to have a Supreme Court decision to make them change their laws.

    The fight is far from over.
     
  10. chevydeerhunter

    chevydeerhunter Well-Known

    1,063
    0
    36
    Feb 23, 2008
    San Antonio
    This was brought up on Rush today. Jed Babbin who was subbing for Rush made a good point. Why doesn't congress make D.C. abide by the Supreme Court ruling? My answer is because none of them have the balls to do it. Pathetic!
     

Share This Page