PDA

View Full Version : DC Council Puts More Restrictions on Gun Owners after Supreme Court Ruling


IZinterrogator
December 16, 2008, 07:16 PM
This is absurd. The DC Council will just keep throwing up garbage and seeing what sticks in their quest to either ban firearms or regulate them to the point where no one will register one. No other right requires professional instruction to use. And somehow I doubt that DC will be footing the bill for the professional instruction and range qualification required.

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=40898

johnwilliamson062
December 16, 2008, 08:55 PM
No other right requires professional instruction to use.
Driving?
Not saying I like this, but this isn't the most ridiculous aspect of regulation by a long shot.

IZinterrogator
December 16, 2008, 09:09 PM
Driving is not a right, nor is it required to have a license (or a registered vehicle) to drive on your own land.

Edit: Come to think of it, I never took a driving course in my life. My dad taught me the basics and I taught myself the rest. Just like how I learned to shoot pistols.

maestro pistolero
December 16, 2008, 09:50 PM
Re-register the gun every three years? Why? It's unnecessarily burdensome.

If the city wants to run a fresh background check on pistol permit holders every three years, that may be their prerogative, but there should be no reason to have to re-register a gun. The serial number isn't going to change.

What could the reason possibly be, except to set folks up for an offense if they miss a deadline? The council only wastes their time on this crap because they lack any meaningful, effective ideas on how to improve living conditions in inner city D.C.

It's obviously more important to them that they simply appear to be accomplishing something, when all they are really doing is pandering to the extreme delusional left. They remind me of teenagers who, once the rules are laid out for them, contrive every imaginable tactic to maneuver around the rules.The intent seems to be to subvert and render meaningless the reason for the ruling in the first place.

In this case, it's the Constitution they are screwing around with. As an American whose family has been in this country since the 1730's, about the time Washington was born, I take this sort of thing very personally.:barf:

blume357
December 17, 2008, 06:12 AM
I kind of feel like if the citizens of D.C. are willing to put up with it... then who am I to think better of it.

then again, didn't these folks re-elect a guy to mayor who had been filmed doing crack with a prostitute? Chris Rock did a great routine on that....

Kreyzhorse
December 18, 2008, 08:10 AM
I would expect this to be returned to the courts. DC is clearly attempting to see how far they can push the SCOTUS decision and see what boundries they can establish. To me, registering a gun every three years and the requirement of a 5 hour class is burdensome. Running a background every 6 years is also outside the Heller decision in my opinion.

blume357
December 25, 2008, 08:25 AM
our highest legal experts, didn't think the citizens of D.C. had any right to protect themselves...

I hate to be a pessimist, but this was what I saw in this decision... that we are one vote away from not having the 2nd amendment at all.