|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 28, 2014, 03:27 PM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
I think we're all talking about at least three different things at once here.
What WE think it means What it ACTUALLY means What the Police Chief has told her officers that it means (for now anyway) The first one is probably optimistic or pessimistic based on ones philosophical bent, the second one is almost impossible to know until things shake out a little more, especially as DC hasn't legislated a response yet, and the third is based on an PDF that's probably reliable right now, but may change at any given moment under the direction of the Attorney General and Police Chief. |
July 28, 2014, 03:38 PM | #52 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
I still need to go back and read the decision itself, but judging from this (thank you diamondd817), it looks like I could legally carry a concealed firearm in DC today*. (From the pdf: "At this time, individuals who do not live in the District shall not be charged with either unregistered firearm or unregistered ammunition, but other charges may apply.")
*=Noting, however, that attempting to do so could still result in a great deal of time, energy and hassle in proving my innocence in the event that some MPDC members "didn't get the memo."
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
July 28, 2014, 03:45 PM | #53 |
Junior member
Join Date: February 13, 2014
Location: Flathead Valley, MT
Posts: 2,187
|
This is positive, but I'm trying to understand exactly what the court is saying. If this is upheld, then DC: (a) MUST allow open carry, or (b) MUST create a concealed carry law scheme like Illinois had to do, or (c) both, or (d) neither - if neither than what exactly must they allow the people to do - carry on their own property only, but not beyond property lines?
You KNOW they're going to do ONLY that tiny amount which they must legally do, with no choice, and even then only kicking and screaming, so what, precisely, must they allow. By the way, the court has not yet ruled on whether it will stay its ruling until the appeal occurs - it very well may NOT issue such a stay, since the court is fed up with the delay tactics of the city here. It may or may not stay the ruling. |
July 28, 2014, 04:52 PM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 5, 2010
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 474
|
so the only remaining court of appeal is the Supreme Court?
|
July 28, 2014, 05:14 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
No from what I understand his was a District Court decision, from here it can go to the Circuit Court with jurisdiction, THEN to the Supremes. At least from what was said earlier.
|
July 28, 2014, 05:38 PM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Any non-prohibited person able to legally carry in his or her own state, or who has a registered handgun in DC will not be charged with simple possession. DC residents can still be charged with having an unregistered weapon.
Beware that the 10 round magazine ban and AWB remain intact, and that TPM restrictions against carrying in schools and government buildings, etc, are also untouched by this decision. |
July 28, 2014, 05:50 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
Something else to ponder: DC has an absolute plethora of different TYPES of cops, plus private and semi-private security guards.
This memo has only gone out to actual DC Police. What about various types of parks police, the feds of various kinds...? Upshot: I would be willing to CCW in DC right now but I think open carry (of a handgun) is asking for trouble, especially in the "tourist-type areas". OH, speaking of tourists...I was at some of the big tourist hot-spots a few weeks ago, Jefferson and Lincoln memorials, etc. They are STUFFED with tourists from other countries...tons of Asian types that I saw (and with very obvious signs they were in big tour groups). Open carry around there could trigger a stampede and that could be...bad PR. I think we need to cool our jets here - this is a HUGE cultural change going on. But you know what? There's an enormous opportunity here too. If this lasts, say, a month, we'd be able to actually track violent crime rates before during and after that month. I don't we've EVER seen a heavily urban area with high violence rates go to "instant Vermont carry" (more or less). We are in genuinely uncharted waters here folks, this is not a good time to "fly the freak flag".
__________________
Jim March |
July 28, 2014, 05:57 PM | #58 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
Now, consider that one can't throw a rock in DC without it landing on some sort of federal property, and things get risky.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 28, 2014, 06:37 PM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,142
|
Okay, but the actual federal police, like the park service, can't enforce the D.C. Code can they? I would think they can only enforce laws enacted by Congress; or, maybe there is a federal law that says they can arrest for D.C. Code violations.
At any rate, I would not want to be the person testing the application of the injunction. |
July 28, 2014, 06:41 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
OK. So what happens if we take that two-page bulletin from the chief, make a ton of copies and staple 'em to telephone poles all over DC, esp. the "hood-rat" sections?
The goal here is to show the types that do the violent crime that it isn't safe to do so, to cause a dramatic dip in the crime rate? We WANT that dip to be as deep as possible, ASAP.
__________________
Jim March |
July 28, 2014, 06:46 PM | #61 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,142
|
Quote:
|
|
July 28, 2014, 06:58 PM | #62 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,466
|
Quote:
But they don't stop. After all, it isn't their money -- it's the taxpayers' money. But in DC? There, it's ALL our money. |
|
July 28, 2014, 07:25 PM | #63 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,466
|
Quote:
The language of the decision doesn't say non-residents must have a permit. It says that DC is enjoined from enforcing the carry law and the registration law against non-residents. On the face of it, I think Vermonters are good to go based on their own recognizance. (But ... if I lived in Vermont I would not volunteer to be the test case.) |
|
July 28, 2014, 07:31 PM | #64 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,466
|
Quote:
|
|
July 28, 2014, 07:35 PM | #65 | ||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,466
|
Quote:
You'll probably be arrested and charged with littering, defacement of public property, interfering with a public utility, obstruction of traffic, creating a public nuisance, and disturbing the peace. Quote:
|
||
July 29, 2014, 08:18 AM | #66 |
Member
Join Date: July 13, 2011
Location: MD *gah*
Posts: 57
|
I think the deafening silence from the normally exuberantly (and irritatingly) over-garrulous Mom's, MSM and others on this is fascinating... since when have they ever been savvy enough to avoid the Streisand Effect?
Just wondering... |
July 29, 2014, 08:44 AM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,254
|
They know this is just the beginning, when it gets to the higher courts they'll get more vocal.
|
July 29, 2014, 10:10 AM | #68 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 11, 2009
Posts: 506
|
Quote:
Apologies if this is a stupid question...my understanding of the law might be way off here, but if they enact a law to regulate carrying, wouldn't that mean they would lose their "standing" to appeal the ruling? So they have a big decision to make - if they appeal they could have to allow carrying for a long time with no regulation whatsoever, only to probably loose in the end anyway. Therefore they will "accept" the ruling and enact as restrictive a law as possible - just enough to prevent anyone from suing on the basis of a "total prohibition". That way, the new law will be protected at least as long as it takes to bring a whole new case, which will be years. |
|
July 29, 2014, 11:10 AM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,142
|
Quote:
|
|
July 29, 2014, 02:04 PM | #70 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
90-day stay issues this morning: NO LEGAL CARRY for now.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...arry-decision/ DC is still trying to figure out whether to appeal or just craft a CCW law of some sort.
__________________
Jim March |
July 29, 2014, 02:39 PM | #71 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Though I can't find the text of the order, the Washington Times quoted this:
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 29, 2014, 03:01 PM | #72 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 30, 2007
Location: South CA
Posts: 566
|
Quote:
I don't trust the rank and file LEO's to change their reflexes overnight, whatever the chief tells them to do. Being right and being shot-up due to a panicked LEO is not a good outcome for me.
__________________
Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world — and never will. — Mark Twain |
|
July 29, 2014, 04:31 PM | #73 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 5, 2010
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 474
|
reporting by "[h/t Dirk Diggler, Esq.]"
bwhahaha.... |
July 29, 2014, 04:39 PM | #74 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
They don't really need much time.
Likely one at a time or in smallest possible increments so as not to lose all at once, I predict... They will pass a "May Issue" permit scheme, a la New York State. They will include fancy buzz words like "denials may not be arbitrary and/or capricious". Instead of county judges like in NY, they'll either create a new position, "Handgun Permitting Officer" or something, or else simply assign it to the Chief of Police. They will allocate a few thousand dollars a year for funding. It will take them about 1 day less than what would get them sued to set up the system. There won't be enough funding to do much of anything once it is set up. Just like in NY, there will be a legal time limit (it's 6 months here) for permit processing but, just like in NY, that time limit will be arbitrarily ignored with impunity. Permit processing might take 18 months. Just like in NY, permit denials will be arbitrary and capricious. Some of the county offices here will tell you point blank, right to your face, that they DO NOT issue concealed carry (unrestricted) permits. It's been that way for decades. The system will include some variation of the "good cause" requirement, as NY's still does. It doesn't matter if it has been or will be struck down, it's another 2-5 years before that happens and many folks who see it on the application in the meantime will simply not apply. They will include training/qualification requirements (a la Chicago) that are onerous and will regulate the start-up companies that try to to meet those requirements to the point that they are nearly impossible to get going. The ones that do get going will be political insiders who will try to make a fortune charging outrageous fees for the classes but scheduling as few as possible. As they already do, they will not allow or they will place onerous requirements on FFLs in their jurisdiction, making opening a gun store nearly (as it is now) impossible. That's just a start, but that's probably enough to get them out another 15-20 years.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley Last edited by Brian Pfleuger; July 29, 2014 at 04:53 PM. |
July 29, 2014, 05:20 PM | #75 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,955
|
Quote:
Does Scullin have a say in this? |
|
|
|