Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Palmer v. D.C. (Another 2A Victory)

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rudy8116
    replied
    Originally posted by Shush View Post
    In Holder's version of the new law, it says that only cartel members are allowed to carry in DC, and if they do not have a weapon suitable to their station, he will assign them one.
    And they must show proficiency with assigned weapon.

    Leave a comment:


  • RR_Security
    replied
    What a generous man Holder is. Maybe he has some suitable weapons left over from "Fast and Furious" that he can lend out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shush
    replied
    Originally posted by RR_Security View Post
    Check the link David Hineline posted. He sez that Emily Miller sez (and I quote)

    I like it, but I find it hard to believe, especially if the "AG" mentioned is Holder. I'd be "waiting for the other shoe to drop" on that one.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]11898[/ATTACH]
    In Holder's version of the new law, it says that only cartel members are allowed to carry in DC, and if they do not have a weapon suitable to their station, he will assign them one.

    Leave a comment:


  • RR_Security
    replied
    Originally posted by ef87c View Post
    Plus i can see that dc wont recognize other states permits, or vice versa.
    Check the link David Hineline posted. He sez that Emily Miller sez (and I quote)
    DC police chief using guidance from AG -- grants full reciprocity for all open and concealed carry from others states.
    I like it, but I find it hard to believe, especially if the "AG" mentioned is Holder. I'd be "waiting for the other shoe to drop" on that one.

    Hell Freezes Over.gif
    Last edited by RR_Security; 07-28-2014, 10:21 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ef87c
    replied
    I can see DC fighting this until they can't and when DC looses, they will treat its ccw permit like MD. For those not familiar with MD its next to imposable to obtain a ccw permit unless "based on the results of investigation, “good and substantial reason” to carry a handgun, including a finding that the permit is “necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger.”In the end only the higher ups in dc govt will have the permits.

    Plus i can see that dc wont recognize other states permits, or vice versa.

    Leave a comment:


  • David Hineline
    replied
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3185813/posts

    Leave a comment:


  • RR_Security
    replied
    " . . . 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." Which many would interpret as meaning "don't implement any near-impossible jump-through-hoops procedures, fees, etc. for licensing," but some administrators will probably try that anyway.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aerohead
    replied
    Sweet! I can carry my gat next time I visit. Boom.

    ....but still not in Maryland...

    Leave a comment:


  • tanksoldier
    replied
    As I understand it that makes DC a constitutional carry zone for now, as the laws prohibiting it are invalid.

    Leave a comment:


  • EmmaPeel
    replied
    Originally posted by WillBrink View Post
    I don't follow. Wut dat mean?
    I'm sorry, Will, I was thinking out loud. I meant for me personally. I live near DC and it complicates things to go in and out of MD, VA, and DC.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rudy8116
    replied
    Boom. Suck on that, anti 2nd crowd.

    Leave a comment:


  • WillBrink
    replied
    Originally posted by EmmaPeel View Post
    Dag, that could help in the logistics planning area......
    I don't follow. Wut dat mean?

    Leave a comment:


  • EmmaPeel
    replied
    Dag, that could help in the logistics planning area......

    Leave a comment:


  • EmmaPeel
    replied
    Wow. Just wow.

    Leave a comment:


  • WillBrink
    started a topic Palmer v. D.C. (Another 2A Victory)

    Palmer v. D.C. (Another 2A Victory)

    Decision on Palmer v. 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. 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."

    http://alangura.com/2014/07/victory-in-palmer-v-d-c/

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 2734 users online. 162 members and 2572 guests.

Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X