Washington D.C. is not into following the law it would appear. At least when it doesn’t suit them is probably a more accurate way to phrase the situation.
Only a few weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the Heller case, which struck down D.C.’s ban on handguns and allowed having a firearm in operable condition at home, D.C. has passed “emergency” law and new police regulations intended to retain as much of the ban and storage requirement as possible. The law was crafted in consultation with the Brady Campaign, according to the Washington Post.
There are many objectionable features to the new D.C. law and regulations, but two stand out as particularly egregious. Though the Supreme Court ruled that D.C. could not ban handguns, the new rules would still ban all or most semi-automatic pistols. And in spite of the fact that the court ruled that D.C. cannot ban the use of guns for protection in the home, the District still prohibits having a gun loaded and ready unless an attack within your home is imminent or underway.
Without Congress’ intervention, D.C. can violate the intent of the Heller decision indefinitely. That is because under “Home Rule,” D.C.’s emergency bills are not subject to review by Congress, and D.C. can reinstitute “emergency” laws every 90 days. The city’s officials are already thumbing their noses at the Supreme Court.
Personally, I would love it if the Supreme Court charged all those involved in these shenanigans with contempt and had them paraded before the Court dressed in those pretty orange jump suits, on television, and had some serious discussions with them.
Tags: Bill of Rights, Gun Control, Law, Supreme Court
Conservative Libertarian Outpost 
July 21, 2008 at 07:05
Evanston Votes To Amend Gun Ban—Tries To Avoid NRA Lawsuit: Unlike the debacle in Washington, D.C., in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Heller decision–and in an effort to avoid NRA’s lawsuit against their city–aldermen in the Chicago suburb of Evanston unanimously voted to amend the city’s 27-year-old handgun ban at a recent closed-door meeting.
LikeLike
July 21, 2008 at 07:08
Village Of Morton Grove To Repeal Gun Ban: Today the Village of Morton Grove also moved to avoid protracted legal action by amending its Village Code to remove the current handgun ban and incorporate sections of the Illinois Criminal Code, following the filing of NRA’s lawsuit against the city.
LikeLike
July 21, 2008 at 07:08
ACLU Of Nevada Declares Support For Individual’s Right To Keep And Bear Arms: In a surprising break from the national office of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Nevada state office recently declared its support for an individual’s Right to Keep and Bear Arms, apparently making it the first state affiliate to break with the national ACLU’s position on the Second Amendment.
This, as well as the two posts above are same source.
LikeLike
July 21, 2008 at 12:22
A more accurate way to phrase your subtitle here:
“Washington D.C. is not into following the law it would appear. At least when it doesn’t suit them is probably a more accurate way to phrase the situation.”
“It would appear Washington D.C. is not into following the law or more accurately, not when it doesn’t suit them.”
LikeLike
July 21, 2008 at 12:31
In other words, your title: Offensively Stupid.
If Constitutionally of the law is your concern, as it is mine, and those not following it should be punished, you’d do better not to continually discredit yourself right off the bat.
LikeLike
July 21, 2008 at 22:01
[…] bookmarks tagged imminent D.C. Refining of Gun Laws–Offensively Stupid saved by 7 others Spyro2008 bookmarked on 07/22/08 | […]
LikeLike
July 22, 2008 at 09:04
Attacking the messenger rather than the message again Marc? Check the sources please.
My comment followed the linked story. As in about the Orange jumpsuits etc.
LikeLike
July 22, 2008 at 09:46
Not that anyone could tell as you refused to use the quotes format from wordpress, or even mention your source’s name, especially at the beginning, or seperate yourself from the commentary with anything but bold print.
LikeLike
July 22, 2008 at 11:46
No one else has had any problems with the links.
Generally, on blogs and forums, bolding is adequate representation that you are inserting commentary.
The quotes tool is better used in other circumstances IMO.
LikeLike
July 22, 2008 at 12:00
I think everyone should also note that Marc does not blog on his own. Nor, apparently does he have a clue about Objectivism as a philosophy. Think Ayn Rand Marc. Here’s a link for you since you seem to be enthralled by them. http://www.objectivism.org/
Marc, if my blog upsets you so much you are more than welcome to pass on by…
LikeLike
July 22, 2008 at 12:21
Well, its cute that you quote Rand but thats moral objectivism, often shortened into objectivism. That however does not mean it encompasses all of objectivism.
Also, I can’t seem to pass you up as you post to the wordpress political blogs.
Not entirely sure what having a multi-author blog has to do with anything, and a “source” as a link generally indicates the source material from which you have drawn your conclusions, not the the entirety of the above is in fact a copy pasted article. Thatttt is generally indicated by the author.
Also, the typical (and if I had my copy of Turabians, the Chicago book of style or MLA format) thing to do when providing an author’s aside is to indicate as much with parenthesis or hyphens. In journalistic format its italics. Bold is an indication of emphasis.
LikeLike
July 23, 2008 at 09:07
This is the blogosphere Marc, not an English class where MLA is required.
LikeLike
July 23, 2008 at 09:19
You’re right Perry, and the blogosphere has no standard writing format, which is why it makes it curious that you’d defend yourself by saying that, “Generally, on blogs and forums, bolding is adequate representation that you are inserting commentary.”
I still contend that bloggers hardly ever do that, hence the source of my confusion as to which author wrote what.
Nor are you beholden to using any official formats, however, those formats are created to prevent any confusion for the reader.
Of course, if you want to keep posting on your blog like any other joe blow would take 2 minutes to post to a tech forum, thats more than your right, but 2 minutes worth of writing doesn’t really make me want to read it does it.
Nor will I, in the future.
LikeLike
July 23, 2008 at 09:20
See ya!
LikeLike