Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forum
D.C. Counsil votes in a concealed carry permit system
It's still a MAY issue system which will be found to be illegal once it gets challenged in court.
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2014/09/d-c-gun-laws-up-for-council-vote-107408.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)at a min. for violating equal protection of the law. The requirements to obtain a gun will likely be challenged as well as being an expensive burden on one's 2A rights. I don't know about the training provisions for carry. In principle, I support these.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,476 posts)...if ever, the principle of equal protection under the law will extend into the spectrum of wealth?
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)she devil: D.C. Counsil votes in a concealed carry permit system
It's still a MAY issue system which will be found to be illegal once it gets challenged in court.
.. to my knowledge, DC has always had a may issue ccw system.
Which is actually what you say above (still), but not sure if you understood it.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_Control_Regulations_Act_of_1975
Maybe you should do some basic research (it took me all of 5 seconds to prove you wrong) before making snide comments like "Which is actually what you say above (still), but not sure if you understood it."
blueridge3210
(1,401 posts)That's going to leave mark!
pablo_marmol
(2,375 posts)jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)lurks often: Your knowledge is flawed ... Maybe you should do some basic research (it took me all of 5 seconds to prove you wrong) before making snide comments..
You should practice what you preach, some basic research longer than 5 seconds, to prevent incorrect & snide comments like you made above, since citing DC's handgun ban didn't prove me wrong.
I am well aware of DC's handgun ban of 1976, & trigger lock laws; I was born in DC & lived around there about 30 yrs.
DC has always been may issue, which is what I contended. Business owners could, & did, obtain concealed carry licenses, as well as federal employees, which makes it may issue. The current 'may issue' law enacted recently liberalized the may issue law to include most all residents.
blueridge {to lurksoften}: 6. Oh, snap! That's going to leave mark!
pablo_marmol {to lurks often}: . jimmy the zero? NT
Oh my, your backslapping caused some of the egg on lurkso's face to fly back onto your own, my my.
gun guru halbrook, 1995 it appears: Congress {then 'in charge' of DC} passed a comprehensive firearms act in 1932 that remains largely in place today. It continued the prohibition on carrying a concealed pistol on or about one's person without a license, which would be issued to a person with good reason to fear injury to his person or property or other proper justification.
... The House committee report on the 1932 bill stated that the measure would "meet the legitimate needs of all who are charged with the duty of protecting and defending life and property as well as those citizens who require firearms for protection or for sport..
... both the Senate report and Senator Capper supported the bill with the caveat that "the right of an individual to possess a pistol in his home or on land belonging to him would not be disturbed by the bill." Of course, the open carrying of a pistol was not proscribed.
... The 1932 act has remained in place with various amendments from time to time. It remained legal to carry a pistol openly until 1943, when Congress made it unlawful for a person to "carry either openly or concealed on or about his person" a pistol, with the previous exceptions for home and business or with a permit.
http://guncite.com/journals/hal-dc.html --- near the top.
ME! on DU!: It wasn't until 1932 that a permit was required to carry a concealed weapon in the District of Columbia. It was legal to carry pistols openly until 1943. At the time, it was clear that the prohibition on open carry did not apply to long arms. In 1973, pushed by Democrat President, Lyndon Johnson, DC was granted "home rule". In 1976, the new District government passed the {handgun ban} Firearms Control.. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172149853#post58
Carrying has always been allowed by any federal employee who has job-related authorization (e.g., a surprisingly large number of employees of the EPA, Veterans Administration, and so on), the very large number of foreign diplomats and their security services in DC, plus the many security guards in the District who are hired by persons who can afford them... The Palmer decision simply allows lawful carry in D.C. by law-abiding and safety-trained residents of properly registered handguns, and by their licensed counterparts who visit the District.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/07/28/licensed-handgun-carry-now-legal-in-district-of-columbia-palmer-v-dc/
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Execeptions such as law enforcement, foreign diplomats, many of whom enjoy diplomatic immunity anyway and security guards on duty isn't may issue.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,476 posts)Let's say I form a corporation located in DC; can I hire myself to protect myself?
I'm sure I'd need to pass some city approved training and such...
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)to a place where your clothes tie in back and they give you some really good meds.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,476 posts)
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)lurkso: There has been a complete ban on residents carrying guns since 1976 .. Execeptions such as law enforcement, foreign diplomats, many of whom enjoy diplomatic immunity anyway and security guards on duty isn't may issue.
You are wrong, you cite 2nd amendment mythology (even some gun control sites misconceptions). Getting a concealed carry permit after 1976 was indeed difficult, but could be done. It was prohibitive may issue, but may issue nonetheless, & not totally prohibited, my original point. There even existed an application for a permit to carry a concealed handgun, which any DC resident could fill out & send in, but it was usually denied. Previous owners of grandfathered handguns prior to 1977 could apply & sometimes did get a ccw, as former police, & qual'd federal workers as defined in a previous post.
DC Official Code 2001 Edition: Current as of 12/9/2005 updated 2/6/06 District of Columbia - § 22-4504. Carrying concealed weapons; (a) No person shall carry within the District of Columbia either openly or concealed on or about their person, a pistol, without a license issued pursuant to District of Columbia law, or any deadly or dangerous weapon capable of being so concealed... http://cd.textfiles.com/group42/WEAPONS/LAWS/DC.HTM
Even rightwing bloviator scalia concurs: Justice Scalia delivered the {heller} opinion of the Court. [June 26, 2008]
The District of Columbia generally prohibits the possession of handguns. It is a crime to carry an unregistered firearm, and the registration of handguns is prohibited. See D. C. Code §§7–2501.01(12), 7–2502.01(a), 7–2502.02(a)(4) (2001). Wholly apart from that prohibition, no person may carry a handgun without a license, but the chief of police may issue licenses for 1-year periods. See §§22–4504(a), 22–4506. DC law also requires residents to keep their lawfully owned firearms “unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device” unless they are located in a place of business or are being used for lawful recreational activities.
.. Mar18, 2008-Decided Jun26, 2008 DC law bans handgun possession by making it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm and prohibiting the registration of handguns; provides separately that no person may carry an unlicensed handgun, but authorizes the police chief to issue 1-year licenses; http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html
District of Columbia (as of March 1979) In addition to {DC} laws, the purchase, sale and (in certain circumstances) the possession and interstate transportation of firearms is regulated by the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968 and Title VII of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act.
Quick Reference Chart
.................... Rifles/Shotguns .. Handguns
Permit to Purchase Yes ........... Yes*
Registration of Firearm Yes ....... Yes
Licensing of Owner Yes ........... Yes
Permit to Carry Yes ........... Yes * Permit required to carry concealed.
Note: {DC} has two sets of laws applicable to firearms. One, passed by Congress, is part of the D.C. Code (Section 22:3201-3217) and regulates the purchase, possession and carrying of firearms. A newer law, passed in 1976 by the DC City Council, requires all firearms to be registered, all owners to be licensed, and prohibits the sale of new handguns. It also prohibits anyone from bringing a handgun into the District or transporting a handgun through the city. http://cd.textfiles.com/group42/WEAPONS/LAWS/DC.HTM
Note in the tailing, DC city council in 1976 did not prohibit carrying concealed in DC, by residents with a license.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)the hypocrisy of the gun control extremists certainly is no surprise. Diane Feinstein who had/has a carry permit and Bloomberg with his entourage of bodyguards spring to mind.
DonP
(6,185 posts)We were the last state to allow concealed carry, thankfully Shall Issue.
But since the 1920's Aldermen and any political favorites were made "Deputies" and allowed to carry, along with family members and staff.
There was even an incident years ago when Alderman Dorothy Tillman actually pulled out a loaded revolver in the middle of a city council meeting and waved it around telling anyone within earshot that nobody was going to mess with her.
Another Alderman, Blago's Father in Law Dick Mell, forgot to re-register his gun collection each year, and by law it should have been confiscated. But they passed a law giving just him an additional month to re-register.
Different laws for the elites you know.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)In New Jersey, Maryland, Hawaii the requirements to get a CCW are so high that the average civilian can't get a CCW.
The you have New York, Massachusetts and California where in parts of the state you can't get a CCW unless you are are a VIP or are politically connected.
DonP
(6,185 posts)Chicago was pushing really hard for a "May Issue" law. Tom Dart, Cook County Sheriff, is still whining about it and trying to stop Cook County applications. I'm pretty sure he had visions of a lot of new "donors" to his next re-election campaign.
The credit for getting us a Shall Issue law really goes to Democrat Brandon Phelps and other "Downstate Dems" that pushed it through against the Cook County elites.
Amazingly 
there are no "gun control candidates" running against Brandon or any of the others that supported it. I guess the Cook County gun control people are all mouth and no money when it comes to supporting their "beliefs". Easier to preen and whine I guess than actually get off your half moons and do something.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)it was a welcome and significant victory
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)As far as I can tell, oneshooter hasn't even read the posts in this thread.
my post 8: Carrying has always been allowed by any federal employee who has job-related authorization (e.g., a surprisingly large number of employees of the EPA, Veterans Adm, and so on), the very large number of foreign diplomats and their security services in DC, plus the many security guards who are hired by persons who can afford them... The Palmer decision simply allows lawful carry in D.C. by law-abiding and safety-trained residents of properly registered handguns, and by their licensed counterparts who visit the District.
Now since the majority of fed workers in DC are commuters, only a smaller percent of those feds would be DC residents (but they exist nonetheless) which tosses in another aspect, whether DC being may issue pertains only to residents. I'm not gonna worry about it since I've made my original point, that DC has always been, to my knowledge, a may issue jurisdiction, even if prohibitive may issue. (I hedge with 'to my knowledge' in case within last couple years it changed, but I don't think so, excepting this summer 2014).
Handgun owners prior to 1977 could attempt to get a ccw permit via their grandfathered handgun, some did, as well as ex cops & I believe DC business owners could as well.
repeat: {DC} generally prohibits the possession of handguns. It is a crime to carry an unregistered firearm, and the registration of handguns is prohibited. See D. C. Code §§7–2501.01(12).... Wholly apart from that prohibition, no person may carry a handgun without a license, but the chief of police may issue licenses for 1-year periods.
After 1976 handgun ban it became a catch22, in that if you wanted a ccw permit you needed to register a handgun, which couldn't be done unless you were an ex cop with I presume a reg'd firearm via service, or a bona fide DC business owner.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)Lurks Often .. And how many were actually issued?
AtheistCrusader .. How many licenses were issued?
I don't know, I did not make any claims as to a dazzling percentage of ccw holders, just that DC has been may issue prior to this summer2014 ruling. I'd guess thousands.
Perhaps a refresher course in how to do your own research is in order for atheistC & lurkso.
First you bring up a google screen, here's a link: https://www.google.com/
Ok, brought it up in a tab? now, from what you want to research, choose a few words & enter in the box on the google. Perhaps 'how many concealed carry permits in DC prior to 2013'.
Then just punch the google munchkin & wait for the results to show up, then click on any you think might provide insight!
Tell me lurkso, in what world is it permissible to insult someone with ad hominem & false accusations, then when shown to be wrong, avoid any apology, retraction or even acknowledgement of your errors? (lurkso to me): Your knowledge is flawed Maybe you should do some basic research (it took me all of 5 seconds to prove you wrong) before making snide comments...
What culture allows you to tapdance away with further errors & ad hominem, as if you had been correct all along? what culture allows that?
What culture allows boot lickers to pat your back, then cowardly slither away as well with no apology for their ad hominems? donde esta Pablo el nada?
What culture allows you to make anal retentive allegations from a wolfpack mentality, then clam up when asked to prove the false allegations?
What culture makes you think this is OK, that up is down, east is west, & wrong is right?
I'll tell you what culture condones it, the GUN CULTURE, that's what.
I've proven what I originally wrote, that DC is/was a may issue jurisdiction, & was not 'prohibited' concealed carry. When a judge or sheriff or panel has discretion to allow concealed carry or not, that is the basis of what may issue is. And that, is what DC had prior to summer2014.
You lurksoften, blueridge, Pablo et al cowards, have shown to be in error for your ad homs & pathetic attempts to discredit what I said. Yet you either flip me the bird as a potshot by asking 'how many permits are there' as if that self exonerated your sorry ***es, or like Pablo & blueridge stick their heads in the sand & go elsewhere to malign some other correctness they don't like.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)...and outward flourishes" Hamlet Act 2, scene 2
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)Where have all the cowards gone? Long time, passing.
Where have all the loud mouths gone? long time ago.
Where have all the cowards gone? turned to ostrich every one.
When will they ever learn? when will they ehhh-ver learn?
lurch2
(17 posts)I'm sure DC has better things it could be spending money on besides reimbursing court costs and the NRA's legal fees when they successfully sue DC over this law.
