The District of Columbia vs. District of Columbia v. Heller
The Washington Times editorializes against Washington, D.C.'s continuing refusal to respect the Second Amendment in the wake of the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller:
In its ruling, the Supreme Court smacked down D.C. gun-control measures and reaffirmed the constitutional protection for the individual's right to own a handgun. Since then, the District has cooked up a labyrinth of pointless restrictions and rules crafted to ensure this fundamental right would rarely be exercised. The city may have gone a step too far, as it is now impossible for any law-abiding citizen to obtain a gun in the nation's capital.
That's because the District manipulated its zoning laws to ensure gun brokers would not be welcome. With no gun stores, the only way to obtain a pistol lawfully is to make a purchase in another state and have the gun shipped to a Federal Firearms License (FFL) holder in the District. A federal law prohibits acquisition of a firearm across state lines in any other way.
The lone FFL holder doing business in Washington recently lost his lease and can no longer perform such transfers.
As the editorial notes, the Second Amendment Foundation and victorious Heller and McDonald v. Chicago lead attorney Alan Gura brought suit against the District this week in order to set this ridiculous matter straight. Considering D.C.'s blatant disregard for the Second Amendment and Gura's impressive legal record on behalf of gun rights, I don't imagine this one will end very well for the District's Second Amendment opponents.
Read the full Washington Times editorial here. Read Reason's coverage of D.C. v. Heller here. Watch Gura talk gun rights with Reason.tv below.
