D.C. Attempts to Subvert Heller

This sentence says it all:

We’re trying to figure out how close we can get to where we were before.

Who was it that said that?

DC Council Chairman Vincent Gray. The intent, of course, is to find a way to subvert the intent of the Supreme Court case in which the right of self-defense with a hand gun was affirmed as an individual right.

But, as is obvious, those that govern the nation’s capital have no desire or intention of allowing that if they can help it.

Who is helping them craft their new law? Who would you expect?

The rules announced yesterday bring the District closer to gun restrictions in cities such as Chicago, said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

His staff huddled with the District on the regulations, but Helmke said it is uncertain which parts would withstand constitutional muster. Firearms may be banned, the majority opinion in the Heller case maintained, only if the weapons are “unusual and dangerous.”

And ban they did. For instance, they banned the possession of semi-automatic handguns – which are neither “unusual” or more dangerous than any other handgun.

Additionally, after initially giving unanimous preliminary approval to legislation that would allow gun owners to keep weapons in their homes without trigger locks as long as they were for “immediate self-defense” the council changed its mind. Instead it opted for more restrictions:

But yesterday, several council members said they agreed with tougher language that requires weapons to be unloaded, disassembled or trigger locked, except when there is a “threat of immediate harm to a person” in the home.

Nickles said residents could neither keep their guns loaded in anticipation of a problem nor search for an intruder on their property. The porch is off-limits, he said, as well as the yard and any outbuildings.

Tell me, when is the last time an “immediate” situation which threatened your life to the point that you had to use a gun to protect it wait for you to assemble the gun, take off the trigger guard and load the weapon?

Of course these “public servants” know precisely what they’re doing and make no apology for it:

Council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) said in a statement that the emergency legislation is a start. “But, because we really haven’ t changed the storage rule from the prior unconstitutional law and because of other features, I do agree that this is a lawsuit waiting to happen,” she said. “But we’ll be prepared.”

[Acting Attorney General Peter] Nickles was more direct: “We figured it out until the court tells us we haven’t.” The new legislation would be in effect for 90 days, and council members expect to start work on permanent legislation in mid-September, Gray said.

2nd Amendment – what 2nd Amendment?

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend