District Of Columbia Refuses To Abide By Supreme Court Ruling

In another feeble attempt at appeasing Washington, D.C. residents, the city council is proposing Bill 17-843, an amendment to the gun ban of 1975. In a recent ruling of the United States Supreme Court, Justice Antonin Scalia stated in the majority opinion, that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual a right to keep and bear arms and that the District of Columbia’s requirement that guns in homes be rendered virtually inoperable, was unconstitutional. Since that time, the District has done little in its attempts to abide by the Supreme Court.

The D.C. Council has instead offered an amendment to Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975, most affectionately known as the D.C. gun ban. The amendment should be considered an act to scoff at the Supreme Court while defying the authority of that court.

I said from the very beginning that if the Court should rule in favor of an individual right and that gun laws should be “reasonable”, that we would spend the next several decades in the courts trying to decide what is “reasonable” gun control. Little did I know that places like the District of Columbia would be so ridiculously defiant of the court’s ruling.

The amendment of the existing bill does very little to insure that every lawful citizen has the right to own and gun and virtually nothing to allow that person to have it easily accessible and operable while in the home.

Each applicant must have an accurate ballistics print, register the gun and undergo and waiting period in hopes of getting a permit. If an applicant is successful, we have to ask what is the real purpose of obtaining a permit to begin with? Of course I’m sure it is the exact intent of the D.C. City Council. Check this out.

Sec. 702. Except for law enforcement personnel described in section 18 201(b)(1), each registrant shall keep any firearm in his or her possession unloaded and either disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device unless such firearm is kept at his or her place of business, or while being used for lawful recreational purposes within the District of Columbia, or for the purpose of immediate self-defense in his or her home.”.

Not only is this amendment discriminatory, it also defies the ruling of the Supreme Court that declared that rendering a firearm inoperable in the home was unconstitutional. This is precisely what Justice Scalia said in his majority opinion.

In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense. Assuming that Heller is not disqualified from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the District must permit him to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home.

Bill 17-843, now being called the “Firearms Control Amendment Act of 2008″ will undergo scrutiny from the citizens of the D.C. A public hearing is scheduled:

Thursday, September 18, 2008
11:00 a.m., 5th Floor Council Chamber
John A. Wilson Building
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004

Please attend. If you would like to speak, contact Victor Bonett by phone at 724-4865 or e-mail at VBonett@dccouncil.us

Americans, we cannot continue to allow government to defy the rulings of our courts and stand in total disregard of the rights of the people. All should speak out against such a defiant bill proposal.

Read more about District of Columbia vs. Heller.

Tom Remington

Related Articles

• NRA Appeals Seventh Circuit Ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court (4)
• Montana’s New Gun Law Going Viral (5)
• More On Obama And Gun Rights (4)
• DC Group To Press For Gun Rights (0)
• U.S. Supreme Court Will Hear Chicago Gun Ban Case (0)
• Two-Thirds Of States Support Second Amendment Incorporation (4)
• Ten Years After Columbine, TIME Still Doesn’t Get It (4)

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!