Mayor Fenty and Co. Gnash Teeth, Tear Hair

Guess who's not happy about today's big decision?

[Washington, D.C.] Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, Interim Attorney General Peter Nickles and Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier announced their disappointment in today's ruling of the United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller.

Mayor Fenty plays down the ruling, and essentially insists that for the next three weeks, the case doesn't change anything. Chief Lanier says that officers are encouraged to "use their discretion" in response to burglaries or assaults where residents have used guns in self-defense—which means that protecting one's home could still result in a trip down to the station.

Here's the video, courtesy of the Washington Post.

Comments

[Nelson Muntz]

Ha, ha!

[Episiarch]

Suck it, douchebags. Arrest somebody for defending their home and get sued for civil rights violations.

[Elemenope]

Awwwwwww.

We weep for you.

[Other Matt]

Nothing else in DC seems to function, what gave him the idea that he even had a chance here?

[SugarFree]

Bit of Catch 22 he did there, emphasizing that you still “can’t walk the streets” with a handgun, but you have to bring them into a police station to get them registered.

How long until a desk sergeant screams “He’s got a GUN!”

[Don]

Based on a reading of this opinion I would love to see the city try to enforce not allowing someone to walk the street with a gun. Of course you can, anywhere in Americ you can.
This ruling said nothing about “only in the home”.

That is nonesense and thye will lose again when they go to court because now every gun owner in the city has standing to bring that.

[Mister DNA]

This seems to be playing out to be the Left’s Roe v. Wade. I visited Talk Left and Think Progress earlier, and there’s already talk of prohibitive registration fees and banning bullets.

The next time you go to buy a gun, prepare to be met with protesters waving photos of gunshot victims in your face…

[GG]

Here’s the video, courtesy of the Washington Post.

Correction: Here’s the video, courtesy of the WaPo.

DU is going schizophrenic on this one!

[mediageek]

So, I wonder if Josh Sugarmann, Executive Director of the Violence Policy Center will be using his FFL (one of less than five in the entire DC area) to do transfers for law-abiding DC residents wishing to purchase a handgun.

You can see Josh’s FFL by doing the following:
Go to The ATF FFL EZ Check web page

And in the open text boxes, enter 1-54-XXX-XX-XX-00725

(The X’s will be blanked out, so you’ll just enter the numbers.)

[Leah]

Mayor Daley is just a tad peeved as well…
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1026348,daleygun062608.article

[Guy Montag]

So, what does the VA Senator, darling of Reason, Mr. Webb think about this one?

Better yet, what does the aid he threw under the bus think about it?

[ed]

In a perverse way (what other way is there in DC?) the pols will be praying for an uptick in violent crimes so they can crow, “Told you so!” If it doesn’t happen they will pat themselves on their backs and attribute it to their continued vigilance.

[Al Swearengen]

An “outraged” Mayor Daley this morning denounced a U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Washington D.C.’s handgun ban as a “frightening decision” and a “return to the days of the Wild West.”

“This is a very frightening decision for America. ?Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society? If they think that’s the answer, then they’re greatly mistaken. Then, why don’t we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West? You have a gun and I have a gun and we’ll settle in the streets,” Daley told reporters at Navy Pier.

Welcome to fuckin’ Deadwood!

(“Frightening, dangerous, do away with the courts, Old West.” Oh the fucking drama!)

[J sub D]

Handguns are likely still illegal in DC.

Not So Fast! Sizing up the Heller Ruling’s Immediate Effect on D.C.

Expect many lawsuits. Expect the DC government to essentially ignore the SCOTUS ruling.

[robc]

Is there not a point where statements like Daley’s become an object or ridicule?

Every state that passed concealled carry laws had the same stuff said. A state rep here in KY spoke of the “blood flowing in the streets.” He recently admitted that it didnt happen. He sounded surprised.

[robc]

object OF ridicule.

[CorduroyRocks]

What DC really needs is a federal Castle Doctrine amendment with no exception for law enforcement.

I’ll keep dreaming.

[Francisco Torres]

“At the same time, we will continue vigorously enforcing the District’s other gun-control laws and are considering other ways to protect the District’s citizens against the scourge of gun violence.”

The “District’s citizens” will probably not buy that last statement. If the Mayor was really interested in protecting citizens against criminals, he would act totally differently than this “turf protection” racket he is running with the help of these bans.

[Paul]

What is it with municipal leaders? They’re the worst kinds of petty tyrants.

[Other Matt]

I’ll keep dreaming.

Think John Lennon would be pissed if you added a verse to “Imagine” illustrating that dream?

[Guy Montag]

robc,

Is there not a point where statements like Daley’s become an object or ridicule?

Of course not. He is Chicago Royalty.

[Other Matt]

Expect many lawsuits. Expect the DC government to essentially ignore the SCOTUS ruling.

Knowing they’ll lose, but forcing people to spend money along the way.

I love our justice system.

[CorduroyRocks]

Imagine I’ve got a shotgun
I’m sure you can see
A guy in my living room
I must live in DC
Imagine all the people
Who’ll see me on Court TV…

Note: Original lyrics available on the NIH website. Isn’t it surprising that a song with distinctly anti-capitalist leanings would be referenced on a government medical research facilities website? Google “imagine verses”

[Paul]

“frightening decision” and a “return to the days of the Wild West.”

Right, a time of relatively low crime and nearly peaceful coexistence.

[Guy Montag]

Paul,

Right, a time of relatively low crime and nearly peaceful coexistence.

I believe he means the television and movie version, not the historically accurate version.

[Paul]

From Washington Ceasefire’s Website:

“Every week in Washington, 2 young people under the age of 24 die of gun violence. . . ”

Wow, it just never stops, does it?

According to CDC: # of young people under the age of 24 killed by homicide or “legal intervention” in Washington: 49.

Half Ceasefire’s figure. Effing liars.

Oh wait, I figured it out. If I include suicides in the statistic, then that number doubles. I wonder how many people died from ‘rope violence’ or ‘bridge violence’ last year?

[ellipsis]

Mayor Fenty says in his press conference that semi-auto handguns will remain illegal. I didn’t see anywhere in the ruling where only revolvers were valid handguns.

Looks like perhaps another round of litigation to allow Glocks in D.C. It’s lame that such foot dragging has to take place.

[Paul]

Mayor Fenty says in his press conference that semi-auto handguns will remain illegal. I didn’t see anywhere in the ruling where only revolvers were valid handguns.

Ha! So, lmnop, still no answer, why are liberals foaming at the mouth about semi-auto’s?

[Other Matt]

Looks like perhaps another round of litigation to allow Glocks in D.C. It’s lame that such foot dragging has to take place.

DC classifies any semi with the “potential”, I believe that’s the word, of carrying over 10 rounds as a “machine gun”. Hence, most semi auto pistols, since even a Glock 27 can carry a 33 round factory mag, are classified as “machine gun” under DC law.

Welcome to the wonderful world of DC.

[Paul]

Wow, Other Matt, that sounds profoundly easy to beat in court. The number of rounds a gun can carry does not, in any way, change the mechanical fundamentals of a firearm, beyond any structural modifications needed to simply hold the ammo. According to the National Firearms Act:

Machine guns – this includes any firearm which can fire more than 1 cartridge per trigger pull. Both continuous fully-automatic fire and “burst fire” (ie, weapons with a 3-round burst feature) are considered machine gun features.

Machine guns – this includes any firearm which can fire more than 1 cartridge per trigger pull. Both continuous fully-automatic fire and “burst fire” (ie, weapons with a 3-round burst feature) are considered machine gun features.

[Other Matt]

Sorry, I was incorrect. Here is the cite from DC Code, regardless of what the NFA says:

(10) “Machine gun” means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot:

(A) Automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger;

(B) Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.

In other words, it’s 12 shots, not 10. Note “readily converted” meaning, drop a new mag in.

From:
Title 7. Human Health Care and Safety. (Refs & Annos)

Subtitle J. Public Safety.

Chapter 25. Firearms Control.

Unit A. Firearms Control Regulations.

Subchapter I. General Provisions. (Refs & Annos)

? 7-2501.01. Definitions.

Actually, the NFA means bullshit in regards to this, because what they’re saying is that “for the purpose of our regulations, we define a machine gun as follows…”, and then the regulations prohibiting them are invoked. Make sense? Not the thrust of it, but how the NFA doesn’t really come to bear?

[Paul]

For the purposes of my regulations, I hereby ban all anonymous blog posts on teh innernet tubes.

Sorry, but “for the purposes of our regulations” means…fuck all when dealing with civil liberties.

If “for the purposes of our regulations” was a get-out-of-jail-free card for every legislator, then anything could go, anywhere, any time.

[Other Matt]

Here should be the cite on that, assuming TinyURL does its job right.

[Paul]

Looks like it didn’t, Matt.

Information
You have requested a page that is not supported by this site.

[Other Matt]

Sorry, but “for the purposes of our regulations” means…fuck all when dealing with civil liberties.

If “for the purposes of our regulations” was a get-out-of-jail-free card for every legislator, then anything could go, anywhere, any time.

No, you don’t understand. I’m not saying it doesn’t run afoul of the constitution, I’m saying that the NFA definition means squat, as they’re saying “HERE is our definition, suck it ass wipe!” You can challenge it as ridiculous and an infringement on rights, but you can’t challenge it and say that when they write “here is how we define it for the purpose of using it within this law”, they’re wrong. Logically, since they’re definining it, they’re right by definition, so to speak. They’d probably lose, but they’d make it expensive for you. DC should have to foot the legal bills for future challenges, if successful.

Now if they were to say “Machine gun is defined as by the NFA…”, NOW you have a basis.

Link doesn’t work, btw.

[Mr. X]

Listening to Fenty suck it up is so much fun…

[Other Matt]

Looks like it didn’t, Matt.

Information
You have requested a page that is not supported by this site.

Yeah, I saw that, see previous. Try here maybe? If not, go to http://www.handgunlaws.us, then All State Laws, then DC, then Search for the above cite. That’s how I got there.

[R C Dean]

Yep, I see our next case being teed up – whether banning semi-automatic handguns, but allowing revolvers, is allowed by the 2A.

Because I believe most semi-autos have either factory or after-market high-capacity magazines.

This may actually be the same case coming back, if Heller is allowed to carry a 1911 .45 at work, but is still barred from having it at home, simply because high-cap magazines are available for it.

This would put the level of scrutiny question very nicely. That ordinance (but not that ordnance) would probably pass illusory, I mean, rational relationship, scrutiny. I don’t see it passing intermediate or strict scrutiny.

[Other Matt]

Yep, I see our next case being teed up – whether banning semi-automatic handguns, but allowing revolvers, is allowed by the 2A.

And the next after that will be the part about ammo. Unless you have a registered firearm in DC, in that caliber, you can be arrested for having ammo or replica of ammo in your possession. In other words, a red dummy round gets you a night in jail.

No shit, this is reality.

Worse, they can’t say “we won’t apply it to 45 yr old joe construction guy driving through” because, well, that guy is white and you’re in DC and if you let the older white guy with no record go, you have to let the young black guy with a four page rap sheet go or you’re a racist (let joe explain that one).

I once asked a DC prosecutor about this, who was all proud that she let off a 60 year old grandfather with only community service. Seems the guy had an unloaded deer rifle behind the seat, in a case, unloaded, in accordance with federal law, coming in from another state (so it’s interstate), who got caught in a checkpoint. The problem was he admitted to stopping and dropping off his granddaughter.

When I asked her why she even prosecuted to begin with, she looked at me like I was crazy. That’s the real problem down there.

[Guy Montag]

Other Matt,

Thank you, I forgot about that stupid DC ‘machine gun’ thingie.

Just wait until all these new gun owners (does DC even sell handguns anywhere?)* find out about the $500/rd. ammunition fine, including spent casings.

*IIRC, federal law prevents people from purchasing handguns outside of their State/Territory of domocile.

[Guy Montag]

Because I believe most semi-autos have either factory or after-market high normal-capacity magazines.

Fixed.

10 rd. is reduced-capacity in the more schooled circles of weaponry.

[Paul]

10 rd. is reduced-capacity in the more schooled circles of weaponry.

Word. It amazes me how fast the post-brady world became the baseline.

Pretty soon, that riff from the Tom-Tom club will only be known as a Mariah Carey song.

[R C Dean]

10 rd. is reduced-capacity in the more schooled circles of weaponry.

Depends on the gun. For a 1911 .45, the seven round mag is normal, but you can buy extended mags that go higher than that.

That’s why I have a Para-Ordnance, with a 14-round standard mag.

[Mike Laursen]

I heard a lot of reactions to the decision from mayors and police chiefs on some NPR news show today. When asked about all the crime that still occurs with current gun laws, the common response was, “We’ll, without those laws there would have been even more crime!”

When asked whether requiring people to lock up their weapons made them useless for defense, the L.A. police chief made a vague argument about locking up guns making it harder for people to commit suicide — I lost some respect for the reporter when he didn’t follow up by asking the police chief what that had to do with the question that had been asked.

[Douglas Fletcher]

“I lost some respect for the reporter”

Come on, Mike, it’s NPR, your respect has long been misplaced if any of it resides there.

[Other Matt]

When asked about all the crime that still occurs with current gun laws, the common response was, “We’ll, without those laws there would have been even more crime!”

It’s funny, isn’t it, in a sad way. It’s like the red light cameras, or speed cameras. They run around shouting about safety and how much it will reduce accidents, then they budget based on no reduction in violations. In other words, they know precisely there will be no reduction, and literally bank on it. Yet, it’s about “safety”, and in a sad way I think they actually believe themselves on some level.

[Seamus]

Then, why don’t we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West?

Good idea, but Daley needs to read a bit more history, so he can learn what a litigious community the Old West was. (And it warms my heart to read how, after the shootout at the OK Corral, Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday were charged with murder and investigated by a grand jury. While no indictments were handed down, that almost never happens today (as the survivors of Dr. Sal Culosi well know).)