Posted on 07/22/2008 10:07:49 AM PDT by Turret Gunner A20
The government bureaucrats of the DC City Council just can't get over the fact that the Supreme Court has upheld your individual right to keep and bear arms. Poor poor pitiful beltway politicians!
So rather than repealing their ban on handguns, the council created a new exception -- the handgun ban does not apply to people who want to register a pistol for use in self-defense in the home.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PaulWeyrich/2008/07/21/a_persistent_threat_to_second_amendment_rights
This means that anyone purchasing a handgun to protect a business or for sport shooting is still in violation of the law.
And to make matters worse, another thing the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional was the requirement that guns have a trigger lock. Well, the DC officials have an answer for that one too. Under their new legislation you can have a gun assembled, loaded and unlocked "only while it is being used." This would mean that the only way to lawfully have an unlocked gun in your home is during the actual occurrence of a break-in or home invasion. Then you can go get your gun, unlock it, put it together, load it and then protect yourself. There are no similar restrictions on the predators breaking into your home. Let's just hope that the predator who breaks into your home is the patient type.
What we have here is the DC city council in a snit. They carried this case to the Supreme Court and got their butts kicked ... and now they're pouting. This will simply lead to another law suit against the city, and another federal court telling them that they're off the mark. More wasted taxpayer money. Your government at work. [Emphasis added throughout}
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PaulWeyrich/2008/07/21/a_persistent_threat_to_second_amendment_rights
One of the items the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional was the requirement that guns have a trigger lock because such locks bar the use of a firearm for self-defense in the home. So what does the post-Heller D.C. Council do? It permits the gun to be assembled, loaded, and unlocked only "while it is being used." I guess the only lawful way to put the gun together, load it, and unlock the trigger is if someone breaks in and points a gun at the victim. But what if the intruder shoots first? What if the victim does not have time to put the gun together for use? This is utter nonsense.
Well look at the bright side. It’s still faster to unlock, reassemble, load, and fire then it is to wait for police response (8 minutes average for priority calls in DC)
Yes, but is it still eight minutes if they respond to the wrong place?
Wait, those were the ambulance guys.
My response to that would be that my home defense firearm(s) in my house are there for the express purpose of providing immediate response to a home invasion, and therefore every firearm is “in use”.
Until the Supreme Court or other Court decides to indict, arrest, and imprison elected officials for contempt of their opinion...
Oh wait...Opinions are like...Oh never mind...
See when we win, we still lose...
Glad I don’t live there...
Oh wait I get it...The Constitution and my individual, unalienable right to keep and bear arms doesn’t apply in some parts of the country where they don’t like it???
Time to put some people into time out for a while...
Until then...Some of us have done what we can, there is not much more we can do that will make anyone who is ignoring this ruling happy, ever again...
It just feels like we are being double-dog dared on this one...
And still no injunction preventing the implementation of all these hoops against these sleezeballs their "new" laws!!!!! Where is all the legal eagle defenders of the Constitution?????
Or just claim that you were “using it” to hang pictures when this lout burst into my home.
They are the only ones needed, anyhow -- to haul away the remains after the intruder shots the guy while he's assembling his gun.
There is a law in place that calls for severe (up to death) penalties for denying civil rights under the color of law.
This needs to be pushed against a member or two of the city council to let them get the idea that we mean business.
Again, we talk amongst ourselves with absolutely NO action and no one can seem to explain why an injunction hasn't been filed against these "new" DC laws thereby restricting implementation of these draconian hoops. Hoops which everyone (including the DC City Council knows) places more imposing restrictions on a SCOTUS defined "right" than existed before the law suit was determined by the highest court in the land. They are laughing at our Constitution with their own cleverness!.
Seems to me it would be slam dunk at the DC appellate level to get these new restrictions stricken down - guess I'm just ignorant of what proponents of the 2nd Amendment can do and what the proponents of abortion "rights" can get done! I'm embarrassed!
When was it, exactly, that public servants decided it was their job to expend the public’s money fighting the public?
Posting new tagline.
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law Under Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S. This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.Acts under “color of any law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under “color of any law,” the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
My question is why has the DOJ not arrested the entire City Council, Mayor, and Police Chief for conspiring AND violating the above statute? Seems to me DOJ is in cahoots with them as well.
There is one minor thing you can do. When in DC, keep your mouth shut and your pistol loaded.
My personal preference is to ignore these twits. Other than some minor hassling from the local police, no one is obligated to obey an unconstitutional law.
Two questions from me:
Their really in a box and many elite just do not know how to behave with regards to the U.S. Constitution. That is how far we have fallen.
DOJ asking self, can I actually throw a several D.C. pols in the klink?
Constitution says you can, go for it bro!
Thankfully I do NOT live in DC. I used to live in MD and drove to work there daily, but now I’m in Tennessee.
The DOJ is FULLY aware of what the DC government is doing, yet they aren’t apparently concerned enough to act.
If the DOJ knew “Regular people” were breaking the law you can rest assured they’d have a truckload of friendly LEO’s there to offer their boot soles for close inspection by the “citizen/s”. If you know what I mean ; )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.