Paladin 37 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) So Heller went to get his permit and they said no.... "Capitol Hill resident Dick A. Heller, whose lawsuit prompted the landmark Supreme Court ruling that scuttled the city's strict firearms control laws, arrived at D.C. police headquarters at 6:30 a.m., 30 minutes before the new gun registration process was scheduled to begin. Heller, accompanied by his attorney, was met on the steps of the building by a cluster of camera crews and Lt. Jon Shelton, head of the firearms registration unit. In an animated discussion, police explained to Heller that he needed to show officials the guns he wanted to register -- and allow them to be test-fired -- as part of the registration process. The new law includes strict storage requirements that opponents of the handgun ban say violate the Supreme Court ruling. Gun owners must keep their pistols at home, unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks. Weapons can only be loaded and used if the owner reasonably believes he or she is in imminent danger from an attacker in the home. The city also has continued to ban most clip-loaded, semi-automatic handguns -- popular with gun enthusiasts -- by including those weapons in its broadly written ban on machine guns, which was not at issue in the Supreme Court ruling. For Heller, Newsham said, that means his Colt .45 cannot be registered." Meanwhile in DC, an attempted carjacking resulted in the driver speeding away in his BMW and the punks trying to rob him fired into the car and killed his wife. Just one of two killings with handguns a few hours before it was possible for someone to actually have one for protection. Oh, except the new DC law says the gun, has to stay at home, unloaded, with a trigger lock-WTF! Tell that to the guy that just saw his wife shot to death that it's for the safety of the citizens. Edited July 17, 2008 by Paladin Quote Link to post Share on other sites
itento 0 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) A couple of days ago I looked up the D.C. law which defines all weapons. Suprisingly it defines a "machine gun" as any firearm capable of firing automatically or semi-automatically if a manual reload is not required after 12 rounds. You would think a Colt .45 (single stack) would not be considered a machinegun under those rules. I think the catch is that the firearm can't be easily modified to a machinegun (i.e. if I put a higher than 11 round magazine in the weapon). I guess that's because you MIGHT have a larger magazine for the Colt, and that would make it a machinegun. I also found out that my S-12 is not only a machinegun but also a sawed off shotgun since the 19' barrel is shorter than the 20" limit in the definition of a Sawed Off Shotgun. Of course if Mr. Heller had a revolver, the process called out in D.C.s emergency legislation is so arduous I'm not sure it's worth it. Edited July 17, 2008 by itento Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ClickClickD'oh 1 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 The issue is going to end up back in court anyways. DCs new rules require the weapon to be unloaded and either disasembled or locked up. I guess they forgot to read the part of the SCOTUS decision that specifically said that requiring a firearm to be either disasembled or locked up was unconstitutional. Of course, this new court case will also be on the tax payers dime. Isn't it great, using our money to deny us our rights. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
elvis christ 451 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 So what's the situation with rifles in DC now? I was under the impression that during the handgun ban, you could still own a rifle in your home, which also was required to be disassembled or trigger locked... Now you can have a pistol, but it must be disassembled or have a trigger lock? That is fucking ridiculous, definitely headed back to the courts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RangerM9 1 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 The issue is going to end up back in court anyways. DCs new rules require the weapon to be unloaded and either disasembled or locked up. I guess they forgot to read the part of the SCOTUS decision that specifically said that requiring a firearm to be either disasembled or locked up was unconstitutional. Of course, this new court case will also be on the tax payers dime. Isn't it great, using our money to deny us our rights. no kidding.... we "gun nuts" should Pro-actively contact Heller/his lawyer and the NRA and list the points that need to be addressed with DC's new law - nip this new crap legislation in the bud. i found reading over the various articles today some intersting points, over 12 rounds possible is not allowed, but a 1911 is not allowed because it could have a longer mag (note: this means they have actually done their homework on what mags are available....i'm slightly impressed!) You have to bring the gun in to get test shot, registered etc, which violates the law about keeping it locked up - hellers lawyer wisely told him not to bring his guns ( a 1911 and a 9 shot 22 revolver - currently kept with a friend in MD) along - but the DC cops said, and i paraphrase since i don't have it in front of me right now...."Heller would not get in any trouble from bringing his revolver into the city to register it" Funny how he didn't say anything about the 1911....only the revolver seems safe.... What if you brought your gun into register, thinking it was legal to do so, and they instead decided that no that is not a legal gun to register since it can take a mag with more than 12 round.....and decided you were illegally carrying and arrested you on the spot, and or confiscated the gun? Think they have not thought of this option? also - you can only register 1 gun per 90 days? plus having to keep it locked up until the rapist has actually penetrated you (thinking from a female perspective here, killer has half slit your throat......WHAT THE LIVING FUCK ARE THEY THINKING???? - HOW IS THAT SELF DEFENSE? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kwicko 8 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Okay, just going by what I've read in this thread so far - What the fuck is the problem with a 1911? Most I've seen have 7-round mags. Okay, a longer hi-cap mag is POSSIBLE, but what the hell ever happened to being presumed INNOCENT in the first place? Isn't the burden of proof on THEM to prove that you DO have a hi-cap mag for your weapon, instead of on you to prove that you don't? Oh, and mister home-invasion burglar guy, could you do me a huge favor and follow me around the house while I gather up all the pieces of my gun and get it put together and loaded so I can shoot your ass? Thanks, that'd be great... So you keep your gun together and loaded in your house. How the hell are the cops ever going to prove that? If you use it to blow some ass-hat away, how can they prove that you didn't put it together first? This is just a stupid, stupid law all around. The only people in DC who are TRULY safer with this crap in place are the criminals. I also love the Catch-22 phrasing of it - you have to bring your (obviously) unregistered weapons down to the Police Department in order to register them. Of course, having unregistered weapons is in itself a crime, and you can't register them unless you take them in first to register them, at which time they're unregistered, and so on and so on... So it's our freedom that Al Qaeda hates us for, huh? Mike Quote Link to post Share on other sites
elvis christ 451 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Yeah, having to bring your unregistered gun into town to have the police test fire it sounds a lot like the old marijuana tax stamp ordeal, where you had to have you dope to get the tax stamp, but it was illegal to have the dope without a tax stamp, leading to your arrest. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RangerM9 1 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Yeah, having to bring your unregistered gun into town to have the police test fire it sounds a lot like the old marijuana tax stamp ordeal, where you had to have you dope to get the tax stamp, but it was illegal to have the dope without a tax stamp, leading to your arrest. the only difference that guns are not inherantly illegal.....your point is valid regardless of the little detail....not even sure why i bothered.....i must just be bored, or feel like being a dick....lol.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bayoupiper 738 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 What this all shows me is that these well-intentioned (dripping with sarcasm) government leaders in D.C. have no intention of following the ruling if they can help it. It also shows what every large city government is going to look like not long from now if this is allowed to continue! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waltham_41 52 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 What this all shows me is that these well-intentioned (dripping with sarcasm) government leaders in D.C. have no intention of following the ruling if they can help it. It also shows what every large city government is going to look like not long from now if this is allowed to continue! Almost exactly what I was going to say Will, you beat me to it. They are going to try to weasel out of the change in the law any way they can. Hell it would not surprise me if they tried to say all you could have was a unloaded single shot black powder pistol and the percussion caps and powder had to be kept at the police station and you had to go there to request a portion of your powder in case of a break in. They do not care about the rights or safety of the honest citizens. All they care about is forcing their will on the general public. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chevymann 13 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bayoupiper 738 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 But that is not the way D.C. is doing it. At least there you can appeal the sheriff's decision in district court. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chevymann 13 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Very true Will... and we don't have to keep them unloaded, torn apart or keep them at home... No evidence of this, but I was told that the CLEO was given that authority back in the 50's or 60's (or whenever segregation ended) to allow the CLEO to refuse permitts to minorities... Maybe we can get Al Sharpton to fight for it.... ROFL Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Arcturus74 0 Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 That is completely insane.... Its amazing the abuses people allow government to get away with. Heck, San Francisco is a "sanctuary city" for illegals.... we need somewhere to declare themselves a "sanctuary city" for gun owners...we may need it soon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 You guys don't understand the D.C. Government. They actually believe their own bullshit. There will never be any reasoning with them. The next lawsuit needs to be a Civil Rights suit , to restore the right to keep and bear. Untill someone from the Justice Dept. puts these asshat Mayors like Fenty or Nagin behind bars for their reckless flaunting of the rights of Citizens, no Supreme Court ruling make a bit of difference. Ask the Cherrokee Nation what a Supreme Court decision is worth. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MD_Willington 11 Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 Hmm, so DC's rules are the same as Canada's rules... DC is almost like a foreign country... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rangerdavid 6 Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 man, shit like this makes me so mad......... I'm just glad I don't live in DC., and don't plan to visit anytime soon, but if i do, i'll probably be breaking the law, and keep at least an ankle holster on me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gaddis 1,689 Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 I always found it kind of funny that certain newspapers think it is well within their legal rights to post both lists of convicted pedophiles *AND* legal CCW holders. So, as a firearms owner, you can see where you rate with these asshats. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.