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/conten...x?RsrcID=40898

johnwilliamson062 · December 16, 2008, 08:55 PM

Quote:

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.

December 16, 2008, 07:16 PM	#1
IZinterrogator Senior Member Join Date: November 8, 2004 Location: Prescott Valley, AZ Posts: 2,457	DC Council Puts More Restrictions on Gun Owners after Supreme Court Ruling 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/conten...x?RsrcID=40898 __________________ "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” - Samuel Adams

December 16, 2008, 09:09 PM	#3
IZinterrogator Senior Member Join Date: November 8, 2004 Location: Prescott Valley, AZ Posts: 2,457	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. __________________ "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” - Samuel Adams Last edited by IZinterrogator; December 16, 2008 at 11:22 PM. Reason: A relevant thought came to mind

December 17, 2008, 06:12 AM	#5
blume357 Senior Member Join Date: August 2, 2005 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 3,943	I'm kind of torn on the issue... 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....

December 18, 2008, 08:10 AM	#6
Kreyzhorse Senior Member Join Date: April 12, 2006 Location: NKY Posts: 12,463	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. __________________ "He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson

December 25, 2008, 08:25 AM	#7
blume357 Senior Member Join Date: August 2, 2005 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 3,943	then again, 4 out of the 9 judges, who are supposed to be 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.

December 16, 2008, 09:50 PM	#4
maestro pistolero Senior Member Join Date: August 16, 2007 Posts: 2,153	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: