Skip to main content

It appears that politicians in Washington DC, are going to see first hand what open carry is like. Will they have to duck and cover?

From this article:

Washington (AFP) - A federal judge has ruled that a ban on citizens carrying handguns in public in the US capital Washington DC is unconstitutional.

In a 19-page opinion, Judge Frederick Scullin on Saturday ruled that "there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.

"Therefore," Scullin wrote, "the Court finds that the District of Columbia's complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional."

Remember, a bullet can travel a mile before it hits the ground - or a Republican.

Where next?

Originally posted to Villabolo on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 07:57 AM PDT.

Also republished by Firearms Law and Policy, Shut Down the NRA, and Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA).

Poll

Should we be glad that Washington DC is now open carry?

80%24 votes
20%6 votes

| 30 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't understand. (3+ / 0-)

    This will please Republicans, won't it?

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 08:18:41 AM PDT

  •  Not unless those guns... (4+ / 0-)

    ...are anywhere near them.

    A million Arcosantis.

    by Villabolo on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 08:22:49 AM PDT

  •  He is a judge in the northern district (2+ / 0-)

    of New York. How can he rule on a DC issue?

    Most of the people taking a hard line against us are firmly convinced that they are the last defenders of civilization... The last stronghold of mother, God, home and apple pie and they're full of shit! David Crosby, Journey Thru the Past.

    by Mike S on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 08:27:39 AM PDT

  •  Gun freedom is just another word for fear (9+ / 0-)

    If everyone is packing heat, when harsh words start, the music stops and we crawl under tables.
    We are regressing back to the chaos of frontier America.

    If cats could blog, they wouldn't

    by crystal eyes on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 08:28:45 AM PDT

  •  Good. (5+ / 0-)

    Laws have yet to stop criminal elements from carry firearms with impunity- at least now properly vetted citizens can carry in their own defense too.

    •  Gun as self defense is a myth. Only in very narrow (12+ / 0-)

      circumstances would that ever be the case.

      The first person killed in the Newtown debacle was heavily armed, very skilled and aware the shit was going to hit the fan at any moment.

      Child forgotten in car? -- Use open source E-Z Baby Saver -- Andrew Pelham, 11yo inventor E-Z Baby Saver

      by 88kathy on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 09:17:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  NATIONAL gun laws are quite effective (6+ / 0-)

      The problem is our patchwork of local laws.

      DC can ban guns but if they're giving them away for free at Waffle House in Virginia with every order of hash browns...

      We've had strict regulation of automatic weapons at the national level since the 1930s and nobody's shot up a bank with a Thompson or a B.A.R. since the days of John Dillinger.

      If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

      by Major Kong on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 10:55:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Automatic weapons have been used in (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea, CarlosJ, 43north, happy camper

        Roughly one out 50 gun crimes. Including shooting up banks:

        http://oag.ca.gov/...
        http://en.m.wikipedia.org/...

        All of these weapons, without exception, is owned illegally. A weapon with a tax stamp has never been used in the commission of a crime- with the possible exception of a police officer who used an issued weapon to kill someone, but I've never found hard details on that rumor.

        National gun laws haven't prevented automatics from being used in crime. They've only made it much harder for people who aren't criminals to obtain them... And what's the point, then?

        •  Bullshit. Gun addicts just make it impossible (7+ / 0-)

          to track guns that are purchased legally and end up in the hands of criminals. So, all guns used for crimes by criminals are illegal, but just magically show up in a pretend black market you've invented to support your bullshit ideas.

          When there is any type of tracking available, the guns used in crime are legally purchased by "responsible" gun owners and then turned over to criminals--straw purchases.

          "If you don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing!" (on a sign at a Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans)

          by ranger995 on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 12:47:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well then, these things never happen... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            43north, notrouble, rduran

            UPS Driver Charged With Stealing Dozens of Guns

            A Southern California UPS delivery driver was arrested Friday for stealing dozens of shipped guns that were sold on the black market, federal prosecutors said.
            If you really want to made a difference, how about we find out where the problem actually is first:

            Hot Guns

            ATF officials say that only about 8% of the nation's 124,000 retail gun dealers sell the majority of handguns that are used in crimes. They conclude that these licensed retailers are part of a block of rogue entrepreneurs tempted by the big profits of gun trafficking.
            California's senator Yee indicted on gun, corruption charges
            (Reuters) - A prominent Democratic California state senator and gun-control advocate was indicted by a San Francisco grand jury on charges of corruption and conspiracy to traffic in firearms, according to court documents released on Friday.
            It seems we already know where the guns are coming from, corrupt politicians and Federally Licensed Firearm Dealers!

            If you want to make a national policy to effect change, then it's clear the FEDERAL government must clean up it's act first and go after those THEY GIVE firearms licenses to.

            If they already know where the guns are coming from, then what the hell's the problem?

            But then you'd have to ask yourself some real honest questions:

            Why is there so much money in firearms trafficking?

            Answer--- Because you made items illegal that PEOPLE want.  When you ban or restrict something, YOU create an instant black market.  

            Shit, we've been through this before, haven't we?  Prohibition and the rise of the Mafia that took control of our political system and still control it today.

            Odd, isn't it?  When you ban something,  people become rich because of it.

            The 20 Richest Drug Dealers of All Time

            People become drug dealers because it's still the only profession where someone without a college education can become one of the richest people on the planet in just a few years.

            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

            by gerrilea on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:39:26 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Strong motor vehicle laws don't result in lots of (4+ / 0-)

              illegal cars and drivers wreaking havoc on the streets.  There is nothing to suggest that sane gun laws will result in more gun crime or enriched gun mafias.  This has not happened in other western industrialized countries, and it won't happen here.

              Sane gun laws does not equal prohibition or the war on drugs.  Why do these zombie NRA lies keep being posted here?

              •  exactly... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Miggles, oldpotsmuggler, ranger995
                Sane gun laws does not equal prohibition or the war on drugs.
                better regulations are not prohibition...but as seen in CarlosJ's comment to me...they assume that is our goal...or at least want to make it look such.

                We are not broke, we are being robbed. ~Shop Kos Katalogue~

                by Glen The Plumber on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:07:25 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Hon, we can agree to disagree. It seems there's (6+ / 0-)

                a problem with verbiage when the results of these "sane gun laws" includes banning magazines with more than 10 rounds, banning specific types of guns, as is repeated ad nauseam, Ban Assault Rifles.

                Now, you've made a false equivalency with cars.  Cars are not enumerated/protected in the Constitution and maybe you really aren't aware of the black market for cars because you don't see it on your TV.

                $50,000 in the US; $149,000 in China

                Mexican auto dealers decry cross-border black market

                Federico Estevez, professor of political science at the Autonomous Technological Institute of Mexico, says such cross-border black market sales have been going on for decades.

                "It's an ancient trade here," Estevez says. "It probably started with the Model T."

                Financial Losses to Counterfeit Auto Parts
                $45 Billion
                And then we have the chop shops.
                Roughly 65% of them are recovered.

                They are found with the help of detective work or after being abandoned in mall parking lots by joy-riders.

                Police say the other 35% end up in Mexico traded for drugs by gang members, sold as scrap metal, or stripped of its parts.

                Shit, with all those laws for cars why can't we stop this?
                Every 26 seconds a motor vehicle is stolen in the United States.

                In 2006, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau, 1,192,809 vehicles were reported stolen.

                -cut-

                Only 13% of thefts were cleared by arrests in 2004.(Insurance Information Institute)

                I guess all those laws for cars can't stop people from becoming a victim.

                And it seems that making drugs illegal has given rise to gun trafficking, even in Rhode Island!

                Now, I must ask:  Is the goal of your "sane gun laws" to save lives or to create more criminals and victims?

                The worldwide Black Market in all goods and services is $10 TRILLION.

                Maybe I should ask this as well:

                If gun sales are going up and gun crimes are going down, why the push for more gun laws?

                Disarming Realities: As Gun Sales Soar, Gun Crimes Plummet

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 12:31:45 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Not if you are going to just keep on spamming (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ranger995

                  cherry picked pro-gun links.  You should post this kind of crap in your own diary instead of derailing the current diary with this sort of misinformation.

                  •  What cherry-picked pro-gun links? (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    gerrilea, Kasoru, Neo Control

                    I don't agree with much of anything gerrilea has to say on the subject, but not ONE of those links goes to a pro-gun site.  Only one, the last one, links to a pro-gun editorial.

                  •  Sorry for so many links, I've worked in the car (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Kasoru, Neo Control, CarlosJ

                    industry for the past 3 1/2 yrs.  I've learned a lot more than most.  And the false comparisons of a privilege to an enumerated protected right get me going.  Had you not made the false equivalency, I'd have said nothing.

                    BTW, the very first link is to a Meteor Blades diary on Feinstein's failure to get the Assault Weapons Ban II passed.  I think he'd be a bit surprised to find out DK has gone "pro-gun".

                    My analysis still stands, there is no misinformation presented.  With all the thousands of laws for cars, from how their manufactured, to mandatory training & testing, how they are to be used, etc, etc, etc.  Almost a million Americans become victims each year.  So much so that their victimization is a $45 billion dollar industry, just in the US alone.

                    -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                    by gerrilea on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 04:21:04 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Point of information (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea, Neo Control
              10. It isn’t true that most gun acquisitions by criminals can be blamed on a few bad dealers. The report concedes that in 1998, “1,020 of 83,272 federally licensed retailers (1.2 percent) accounted for 57.4 percent of all guns traced by the ATF.” However, “Gun sales are also relatively concentrated; approximately 15 percent of retailers request 80 percent of background checks on gun buyers conducted by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.” Researchers have found that “the share of crime gun traces attributed to these few dealers only slightly exceeded their share of handgun sales, which are almost equally concentrated among a few dealers.” Volume, not laxity, drives the number of ill-fated sales.
              http://www.slate.com/...

              Its pretty clear that dealers seem to have the same error rate adjusted for size.  

              I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

              by DavidMS on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:55:39 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I read that as well but I'm having a problem (0+ / 0-)

                understanding what is actually being said.

                I understand that of the guns the ATF decided to trace, they went back to a high volume dealer.  1.2% sold 57% of the guns used in crimes.

                This part doesn't make sense to me:

                However, “Gun sales are also relatively concentrated; approximately 15 percent of retailers request 80 percent of background checks on gun buyers conducted by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.”
                Why wouldn't they focus on those gun dealers then?  If that many people are going to specific shops, then find out who the people are, right?

                Let's assume innocence on the part of the dealer, first.  Do they have multiple retail locations?  An aggressive advertising campaign and great sales representatives?  Are the majority of purchases in untraceable cash?

                If these things are known, then what's the issue?

                Is it something nefarious?  Connections to the local political machine that turns a blind eye to their mischief?  Outright knowledge of straw purchasers and them continuing to sell to them?

                I found this final sentence to be untenable, just from my layman's perspective:

                Volume, not laxity, drives the number of ill-fated sales.

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 04:37:44 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Um.... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Glen The Plumber, ranger995

          ...then you can arrest the criminals for owning automatics, without waiting for them to use said automatics in a crime?

          You have lottery-level chances of "defending" yourself with your own gun. You have a much better chance of having it stolen.

          And even when someone claims to have "defended" himself, the claim is often unjustified. There's no way to find out whether a criminal who runs away when discovered was running because of being discovered or running in fear of whatever heat the discoverer was packing. Criminals run off when they're discovered in Canada, too, where they can be virtually certain the intended victim doesn't have a handgun and is not very likely to have a loaded long gun (it takes a while to get into a gun safe).

          This is the landscape that we understand, -
          And till the principle of things takes root,
          How shall examples move us from our calm?

          (Mary Oliver, "Beyond the Snow Belt.")

          by sagesource on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 02:12:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  great argument for classifying all (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          88kathy, Johnny Nucleo, ranger995, Miggles

          semi-auto the same as auto...thanks for that info.

          We are not broke, we are being robbed. ~Shop Kos Katalogue~

          by Glen The Plumber on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 04:44:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So change terms denoting mechanical difference (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea, 43north, Neo Control

            to be the same in law to serve a political purpose while intentionally muddying language in order to confuse people who understand the actual difference...

            Couldn't have pointed out exactly how nefarious the anti-gun agenda (like all anti-rights agendas) actually is.

            •  ha..!! (4+ / 0-)

              the user showed that the regulation of full-auto has been effective...so including semi-auto under the same rules to reduce gun violence is a nefarious plot to deny rights by a anti-gun gun-owner.

              muddy indeed...your reasoning.

              We are not broke, we are being robbed. ~Shop Kos Katalogue~

              by Glen The Plumber on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:21:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You said you wanted to add semi auto to the (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gerrilea, DavidMS, Neo Control

                definition of full auto, not change the law.  If you want your ideas to come across clearly you should take the care to ensure your words mean what you want to convey.

                •  actually...no I did not...I said classify... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  oldpotsmuggler, DerAmi
                  classify |ˈklasəˌfī|

                  verb (classifies, classifying, classified) [ with obj. ]
                  arrange (a group of people or things) in classes or categories according to shared qualities or characteristics: mountain peaks are classified according to their shape.

                  ...my words meant as I intended.

                  I want them grouped in the same category...because of shared characteristics...therefore they would fall under the same regulations...which according to the parent comment...are effective.

                  no where did I use the word define or definition...but that did not stop you from making seemingly paranoid assumptions...which you used to define me...and all that seek to reduce gun violence as people that are part of some nefarious politically-motivated plot to take your guns.

                  and really...who's motivation should be in question..??..the person active in many topics on a site dedicated to electing Democrats...open and supportive of others and their causes...or the one that only seems to only comment in days old diaries...on only one topic and accuses the other of being part of a nefarious plot..??

                  We are not broke, we are being robbed. ~Shop Kos Katalogue~

                  by Glen The Plumber on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:02:30 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Which explains why we need a rigorous system of (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Glen The Plumber, oldpotsmuggler

          registration and tracking.  Every illegally owned gun at one time was legally purchased and owned.  We need laws that can levy responsibility on people who (1) criminally sold guns to people who should not have them, (2) negligently stored their guns so that they were easy to steal, and (3) failed to report the loss of the firearm in the first place.

  •  here's a surprising factoid (10+ / 0-)

    On September 12, 1991, Scullin was nominated to the Northern District bench by President George H. W. Bush. He was confirmed by the United States Senate on February 6, 1992, and received his commission on February 10, 1992.

    He served as Chief Judge of the District from 2000 until 2006, when he assumed senior status.

    Scullin was also appointed by Chief Justice Rehnquist to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a term of seven years running from 2004 until 2011.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    And these are always fun (judges financial disclosures)

    http://www.judicialwatch.org/...

    Sure got heavy into oil ...

  •  Besides working out a reasonable way to (5+ / 0-)

    implement licensure, when the heck are these large cities going to work out a way of protecting their citizens?

    Murder rates are just unbelievably high.

     In such a rich city why is there so much inequality? When is Washington DC going to spend the money to make their city safe?

    “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

    by ban nock on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 09:58:47 AM PDT

    •  Stop pretending you give a shit about our cities. (9+ / 0-)

      You know nothing about them and your bullshit libertarian gun crazy fantasies are a good reason why guns are so accessible in the city.

      "If you don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing!" (on a sign at a Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans)

      by ranger995 on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 10:26:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You seem angry. What gun fantasies? What gun? (5+ / 0-)

        Libertarian? So many angry assumptions for so few words.

        “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

        by ban nock on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 02:27:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Funny, aren't they so accessible because (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        43north, notrouble, rduran, Neo Control

        the constitution guarantees it?

        Heck, I thought so.

        On his journey through the legal process, McDonald said he came to understand more about his history and the "slave codes" enacted in Southern states during the Civil War that prohibited slaves from owning guns. After slavery was abolished, states adopted "black codes" that applied to freed blacks.

        "There was a wrong done a long time ago that dates back to slavery time," said McDonald. "I could feel the spirit of those people running through me as I sat in the Supreme Court."

        Your misguided belief system would deny us Equity Under Law.

        If that makes me/us evil "libertarians", sobeit!

        You have one choice left to you.  

        Article V.

        -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

        by gerrilea on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:50:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  What money? (11+ / 0-)
      When is Washington DC going to spend the money to make their city safe?
      One of DC's unending travails is it's meager tax base.  Federal property is not taxable and most of the richie riches who parade down K Street and around Capitol Hill live in - and are taxed in - Virginia and Maryland.  

      The Republican House loves interfering in the running of the city, of forcing Yahoo Genius on the city's urbanites, and ensuring that the locals (majority?  African Americans) remain powerless.  We're not even allowed a voting member of the House and no representation at all in the Senate.

      "Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison

      by KateCrashes on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 10:33:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I know someone in Georgetown, went there once and (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AlexDrew, gerrilea, 43north

        spent the night even. Down the street were the residences of lotsa rich people. Top fifth averages $260K, bottom fifth $19K, one of the worst cities in America for inequality, but then most cities are very unequal.

        I read about people in Detroit getting the water shut off and I just don't know what to think. How can people treat their fellows so horribly?

        “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

        by ban nock on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 02:32:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Best stay out of the big bad city ban nock (6+ / 0-)

      I don't want to have to fight you for a parking space when I go to brunch ;)

      If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

      by Major Kong on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 10:56:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rates of gun violence are far higher in rural (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Glen The Plumber, oldpotsmuggler

      than urban areas.  The Center for Gun Policy and Research at JHU has shown that after you control for demographics, etc, that gun violence is higher in places with more permissive gun laws.  These statistics also show that places with more rigorous gun safety laws are incrementally safer, even when they border gun nut jurisdictions (e.g. Virginia in the case of DC).  So in answer to your questions, large cities are spending money and enacting laws to make their citizenry safer from gun violence.

  •  I mean really (7+ / 0-)

    What could possibly go wrong?

    If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

    by Major Kong on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 10:47:52 AM PDT

  •  THERE WILL BE RIVERS OF BLOOD! BLOOD!!!!!!111!!... (8+ / 0-)

    THERE WILL BE RIVERS OF BLOOD! BLOOD!!!!!!111!!!111!!111!

  •  Your poll needed a couple of other choices (6+ / 0-)

    & thanks for the info.

    I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

    by a2nite on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 12:34:09 PM PDT

  •  Is this a first? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Glen The Plumber

    I haven't followed this closely enough to be sure. Policy wonks are invited to chime in.

    Under Heller v. DC, just about any firearms law short of a complete ban might be permissible.

    I'd been under the impression that in the post-Heller era the courts had been routinely upholding gun control laws.

    Is this an exception, or (very possible) am I misinformed?

    Anyone considering a dog for personal safety should treat that decision as seriously as they would buying a gun.

    by Dogs are fuzzy on Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 03:54:38 PM PDT

  •  You can't swing a Cat in D.C. without hitting (4+ / 0-)

    a Republican.

    Scalia and Scotus had ruled previosuly that "REASONABLE" restriction was Constitutional. An outright ban simply isn't, I can't see this being a Surprise. Just write a proper gun control law like many other cities have.

  •  "Open carry?" (5+ / 0-)
    It appears that politicians in Washington DC, are going to see first hand what open carry is like.

    The decision bars DC's "complete ban" on carrying handguns for self-defense in DC. In that, this district court judge follows the 7th and 9th Circuits, and the handgun/self-defense/properly-qualified-owner parameters of Heller. The DC Council - which has been opposed to expanding gun laws - will certainly legislate a replacement for the sections of its code that are barred by this decision. (E.g. The prime condition would be to limit locations where carry is permitted.)

    [Obviously, it will seek a stay from the district judge or the Circuit court. Given the need to fill in details, I'm thinking a stay is highly likely.]

    Some points and questions:

    (1) The decision seems to void residency requirements, which would be a leap beyond Heller for gun rights.

    (2) Contrary to the diarist, I do not see language in the opinion that requires DC to allow "open" carry in public as contrasted to "concealed" carry. Or to do so without a special permit that allows it.

    (3) But if open carry is allowed, the non-resident who comes from a concealed-carry state that doesn't allow open carry could ostensibly pull that sucker out and wear it across her chest.

    If the decision doesn't require DC to allow open carried handguns, the DC Council has a very interesting policy choice. It could decide not to restrict open carry and watch the Texas-style militia types swagger around DC streets. The Beltway media - concentrated largely within DC and accounting for everything as politics whether it's sports, style, or dining out - would have quite a field day.

    According to Alan Gura, the successful lawyer in this long-standing case (and an acknowledged expert in gun rights advocacy):

    Gura said that allowing people to carry handguns for self-defense will cut crime.

    “This is a fantastic improvement in public safety,” he said.

    What an, er, interesting social experiment! Body armor may be right around the corner. Literally!

    2014 is HERE. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

    by TRPChicago on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:30:01 AM PDT

    •  Wouldn't bank on much of an experiment (0+ / 0-)

      The gap between what people can do and will do is amazing wide when it comes to guns.  I don't think anyone in DC thinks this will have any discernible impact whatsoever on gun crime, daily life or the like.  A militia march through the streets of DC would be an odd, rare and soon to be forgotten spectacle--pretty much like any open carry event when you get down to it.

  •  Victory! (4+ / 0-)

    More rights are respected for more people the goal of every liberally-minded person.

    And with the Chief of Police declaring DC now Constitution Carry friendly (so long as compliance with mag limit and firearm type are met) its a major step in the right direction.

    •  I think you are confusing liberal with libertarian (4+ / 0-)

      because there is nothing liberal minded about valuing property rights over people or life.  This is why pro-gun arguments ring so hollow at a progressive site like dailykos.  Something like 95-99% of DC residents want strong gun safety laws.  We don't want armed kooks strutting around our streets and national monuments spooking all the other visitors.  

      •  Don't worry I am not. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea, DavidMS, Neo Control

        I think you're using liberal as a synonym for progressive while I am using it as someone who believes in the philosophy of negative rights - its original meaning before it was co-opted.

        And if 95-99% of the deep south had not wanted Jim Crow laws abolished would that make them correct or is it the case that no matter how much any majority wants to infringe on the rights of others that the infringement is to be fought against and rights are to be respected?

        •  Again, there is nothing liberal or progressive (5+ / 0-)

          about gun rights absolutism.  That is in the realm of libertarianism, anarchism, and general right wing whackadoodlism.

          And I see what you did there, attempting to equate gun safety laws with Jim Crow.  What next?  Claim that gun nuts are discriminated against just like African Americans or gays or women?  Sorry, but that shit doesn't work here.

          •  Oh you are SO entertaining! (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DavidMS, Kasoru, Neo Control, rduran

            Have you heard of calvin and hobbes? The little boy and his stuffed tiger, you know it? There was one comic that is brought to mind by your comment, it was calvin creating an imagination-scene of a train derailment that combined with a plane crash all landing on top of a hapless car.

            That's the hot mess that is your comment - so deep into the territory of ridiculous that it swings all the way around the earth and appears in the category of 'fascinating'.

            I only need ONE image to show you are completely detached from reality. This ONE image introduces the fact of a racist republican glory-boy who enacted gun control in the pursuit of racial goals. Oh, that's right, you call it "Gun Safety".

            Well, your gun-safety icon of worship was none other than ronald reagan, who woke up one morning to this newspaper and promptly jumped into action because black folks had rights and he couldn't stomach that.

            I'm sure you are feeling just awesome for following in his footsteps.

            MLK never really took back these words - "Maybe we just have to admit that the day of violence is here, and maybe we have to just give up and let violence take its course. The nation won't listen to our voice - maybe it'll heed the voice of violence."

            by JayFromPA on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:45:03 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You are bringing up stuff from almost 50 years (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DerAmi

              ago to somehow prove that sane gun laws = racism?  What next?  Go Godwin?  FAIL.

              Simply look at the circles that gun toters run in today:  they cover the nexus of white supremacism, anti-immigrant racism, ultra reactionary conservatism, sovereign citizenry, and conspiracy theorists who think that the 2nd amendment exists as a means to overthrow the government.  Sorry, but the gun rights absolutism of today is totally at the core of the conservative mindset and everything ugly.

              •  You call it "sane". I call it "authoritarian". (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Neo Control, rduran

                You call it "sane". I call it "authoritarian".

                •  I agree with the sentiment, (0+ / 0-)

                  if not the prescription.  Prohibition has traditionally been implemented to the severe detriment of the underprivileged, and it's disingenuous to divorce the gun control debate from both the historical and ongoing consequences of authoritarian federal and state efforts to reign in gun violence.

                  I think it's time the Left abandoned the progressive bent for criminalization and intrusiveness and embrace liberal solutions aimed at regulating the trade and maintenance of arms.  I'm less concerned with the fact that someone is carrying openly in a restaurant than I am with the fact that it is pulling teeth to trace custody of weapons and ammunition, prevent diversion of firearms into the criminal aftermarket, and ensure compliance with training and safe storage standards.  I've no patience for proposals that fling felony jail time (which more often than not lands on the heads of people of color than the intended targets) when we barely touch on preventative administrative measures (qualification, confiscation--temporary and permanent, civil fines and fee structures, and audits) can be applied with far greater frequency and effectiveness at far less cost.

                  •  The ATF traces nearly all guns from crime scenes. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    rduran

                    Go look on their site, I don't have the link on this mobile.

                    Last I recall, the most recent data is four 2012 although now that it is July 2013 might be available.

                    As for training, pay for it through state taxes and administered by local or state police departments, freely accessible to all. The message is simple, if you want training to get more widespread then you must make it available and free or only a token fee.

                    MLK never really took back these words - "Maybe we just have to admit that the day of violence is here, and maybe we have to just give up and let violence take its course. The nation won't listen to our voice - maybe it'll heed the voice of violence."

                    by JayFromPA on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 09:39:52 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Have no problem with spending (0+ / 0-)

                      out of the general fund to provide education and training.  Hell, I'll one up you and suggest that the public should subsidize the cost of safeguarding weapons.  I'm a liberal, not a progressive.  My preferred solutions to problems do not involve putting down people whose cultural habits I might find distasteful.  I much rather use public power and resources to achieve an end than the stick of the criminal justice system.

                      Firearms trace data may be woefully incomplete.  ATF simply reports trace requests and fulfillments.  We have no idea whether the firearm was used in the commission of a crime, or simply present at the scene.  And of course the public has no visibility into the lawful trafficking of firearms--the very data needed in order to prevent diversion in the first place.

                      •  The BATFE processes more data than that. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        andalusi

                        And they make it available in PDF files.

                        I've lost the original link (old laptop died, I hate windows 8), but happened to have these already loaded to the image library to rebut the emotional panic that was surrounding sandy hook.

                        This is the sort of stuff available at the atf site for every state.

                        You have to drill down to 5th place before you get to a crime that involved actual human-on-human aggressive action.

                        ----------------------------------------------------------------
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                        Yeah, the 'assault weapons ban' was really going to make a difference in those numbers.
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                        The first non-pistol caliber is all the way down in 9th place. Very different than what the "OH NOES!" crowd presents through their fact-free emotion-driven arguments.
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                        Looks like Connecticut's main source for guns is...Connecticut!
                        Sort of puts a hole in the often-claimed reason for guns being in non-gun zones: "They come in from neighboring states".
                        Utter bullcrap. The trace data shows a different story.
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                        Furthermore, it looks like there is more crime involving guns going in in Connecticut's larger cities than other places. That whole "City people know how to get along with each other" thing doesn't seem to hold up - according to the BATFE's hard data on gun tracing.
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                        Seems that whole "Buy a gun and immediately go out and do crimes with it" argument that is often used to propose longer waiting periods is also 'shot down' by actual data compiled by actual federal agency.
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------

                        MLK never really took back these words - "Maybe we just have to admit that the day of violence is here, and maybe we have to just give up and let violence take its course. The nation won't listen to our voice - maybe it'll heed the voice of violence."

                        by JayFromPA on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 01:59:21 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I'm not retreading old debates (0+ / 0-)

                          over ATF trace data.  My argument is that it's insufficient for the purposes of preventing diversion into the criminal aftermarket.  After all, it's only constructed after a crime  and when a traceable crime gun has been recovered.

                          •  What do you want, then? A 1984 structure? (0+ / 0-)

                            Yes, it's investigated AFTER a crime.

                            What's the alternative, BEFORE a crime?

                            Have you really thought through all of the elements that must be put into place in our legal system and domestic surveillance system and into our very national identity in order to investigate such things BEFORE a law is broken?

                            You are aware that your complaint about the timing of the investigation leads directly into a 1984 scenario, are you not?

                            Or are you pushing for some sort of "Pre-Crime Division" that attempts to predict a crime and jails people before a crime is committed?

                            I'm having trouble taking you seriously, because to my eyes you want to aim this country into either an actual 1984 or want to find a way to put a "Minority Report" style judicial system into power over the general population.

                            All because you have a problem with things being investigated AFTER a crime is committed.

                            MLK never really took back these words - "Maybe we just have to admit that the day of violence is here, and maybe we have to just give up and let violence take its course. The nation won't listen to our voice - maybe it'll heed the voice of violence."

                            by JayFromPA on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 02:28:15 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes, before a crime (0+ / 0-)

                            We have any number of regulations, processes, and tools available to prevent or deter crime and torts.  Lowjack, metal detectors, security tokens, chain of custody procedures, civic education, W-2 and I-9 forms, VIN numbers, etc., etc., etc.

                            I don't see how any of that adds up to 1984 or Minority Report.  Hell, as far as I'm concerned much of the criminal justice system is inappropriately concerned with managing activity that would probably dealt with best civilly or through administrative processes.  Running up 300 out of every 100,000 African Americans on weapons charges, for example, is devastating to entire communities and costly to the public.  I cause a potentially deadly single car accident, I may risk my license and far greater scrutiny but I do not risk my freedom.

          •  Progressive, no. Liberal, maybe (0+ / 0-)

            My view is liberalism really doesn't have anything to say about it.  The Second Amendment isn't core to our vision of society.  On the other hand, liberals were--for most of the 20th century--First Amendment absolutists, and butted heads with conservatives and progressives on that point.

      •  I think you're confusing liberal with progressive (0+ / 0-)

        That's not to say liberals are of one mind on the gun rights issue--precisely because the property implications--but I don't think that's an overriding liberal concern.  

        Granted, progressives are clearly ascendent on the Left right now, and I don't doubt that DC residents find this decision anti-democratic and meddlesome.  

  •  I'll make this prediction right now (0+ / 0-)

    legal open carry in DC would have no measurable impact on gun violence whatsoever.

    DC's tried prohibition.  Doesn't work well because she's a small island in a sea of guns.  Same issue with many large cities in states with increasingly liberal gun laws.  Very well.  Time for Plan B.  Track the guns.  There's no absolute right to be free of public inspection of weapons in your custody, and the public has a compelling interest to ensure that citizens comply with laws regarding safekeeping and proper use of dangerous implements and materials.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site