C0untZer0 Posted May 19, 2015 at 11:30 PM Posted May 19, 2015 at 11:30 PM If defendants appeal they would go before the D.C Cir. the same court that ruled in Heller. I think another message being sent to the lower courts is that they can't just sit on 2A cases for years
Tango7 Posted May 19, 2015 at 11:59 PM Posted May 19, 2015 at 11:59 PM Even if they rewrite the ordnance, it will most likely be garbage. These people just won't stop. It's a combination of stupidity and stubbornness. How many lawsuits have been filed against the DC Council including Heller? Maybe eight or nine? They never learn. It's not that they don't learn, it's that they don't care. They're immune from prosecutions for even the most blatant violations and they can just go back to the well of tax money to pay for the original laws the oppress and the lawyers to fight the losing cause to continue the oppression. Just like Rahm having to sign the check paying for the SAF and NRA legal bills fighting Daley's unconstitutional and immoral denial of rights. It didn't come from his pocket or his campaign funds, so he doesn't care.
1911 .45 Posted May 20, 2015 at 12:45 AM Posted May 20, 2015 at 12:45 AM Even if they rewrite the ordnance, it will most likely be garbage. These people just won't stop.It's a combination of stupidity and stubbornness. How many lawsuits have been filed against the DC Council including Heller? Maybe eight or nine? They never learn.It's not that they don't learn, it's that they don't care. They're immune from prosecutions for even the most blatant violations and they can just go back to the well of tax money to pay for the original laws the oppress and the lawyers to fight the losing cause to continue the oppression.Just like Rahm having to sign the check paying for the SAF and NRA legal bills fighting Daley's unconstitutional and immoral denial of rights. It didn't come from his pocket or his campaign funds, so he doesn't care.It's quite easy being stupid with other peoples money.
Plinkermostly Posted May 20, 2015 at 12:50 AM Posted May 20, 2015 at 12:50 AM All true. Some of the blame needs to go to the SCOTUS -- all they really needed to do was say: 'keep,' 'bear,' and 'infringe' are not negotiable.
domin8 Posted May 20, 2015 at 04:02 AM Posted May 20, 2015 at 04:02 AM Two of the plaintiffs in Wrenn are residents of the district, and one is a Florida resident. The judge's order, I presume, applies equally to residents and non-residents. Anyone planning to take a trip to D.C. , get the training, and submit an application? It's tempting--"just because." I'm waiting on more clarification. It'll likely come from Emily Miller. With me moving to Philly it'll be very easy to take this on. $75 is much easier to deal with than $300. I am hearing that your firearm would have to be registered to you, which requires DCPD firing it.
borgranta Posted May 20, 2015 at 01:52 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 01:52 PM Even if they rewrite the ordnance, it will most likely be garbage. These people just won't stop. It's a combination of stupidity and stubbornness. How many lawsuits have been filed against the DC Council including Heller? Maybe eight or nine? They never learn. They might learn if they are charged with conspiracy to deprive of rights.
kwc Posted May 20, 2015 at 05:49 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 05:49 PM Many of us already have most of the training we need (combination of NRA BP, IL CCL, military, instructor, hunter safety, etc.) to get us to the required 16 hours + 2 hours range time. We would still require a DC instructor to provide training on DC laws. You must also appear in-person to submit the application. Do we know for sure if firearm registration is required for non-residents? I may have another trip to the D.C. region in the next couple of months. Depending on the status of the appeal process by that time I very well may give this a shot. domin8, please keep us updated on your progress after your move. It would be ironic to obtain a D.C. license yet still be unable to get an FCCL in Illinois as a non-resident.
Tvandermyde Posted May 20, 2015 at 07:00 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 07:00 PM Keep an eye on the whole gay marriage issue as if they rule on the full faith and credit clause applies, it willmget real interesting on carry licenses
StogieRob Posted May 20, 2015 at 07:34 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 07:34 PM Keep an eye on the whole gay marriage issue as if they rule on the full faith and credit clause applies, it willmget real interesting on carry licensesCan you elaborate on this??? ThanksStogieRob Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Tvandermyde Posted May 20, 2015 at 08:25 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 08:25 PM If they rule that the full faith and crdit clause applies to marriage licenses, then how can it not apply to a carry license, and i would expect some litigation challenging states who do not recognise out of state licenses
mrpapageorgio Posted May 20, 2015 at 09:57 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 09:57 PM If they rule that the full faith and crdit clause applies to marriage licenses, then how can it not apply to a carry license, and i would expect some litigation challenging states who do not recognise out of state licenses <- How the anti-gun, but pro-gay marriage group will react once they see that argument in the lawsuit. However, I also felt prohibiting out of state license holders from carrying also violated Freedom of Movement under Privileges and Immunities, but that's for another thread.
domin8 Posted May 20, 2015 at 09:58 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 09:58 PM Ironically, many of the same states that are pushing gay marriage also happen to be May Issue. How ironic.
lockman Posted May 20, 2015 at 11:13 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 11:13 PM Many of us already have most of the training we need (combination of NRA BP, IL CCL, military, instructor, hunter safety, etc.) to get us to the required 16 hours + 2 hours range time. We would still require a DC instructor to provide training on DC laws. You must also appear in-person to submit the application. Do we know for sure if firearm registration is required for non-residents? I may have another trip to the D.C. region in the next couple of months. Depending on the status of the appeal process by that time I very well may give this a shot. domin8, please keep us updated on your progress after your move. It would be ironic to obtain a D.C. license yet still be unable to get an FCCL in Illinois as a non-resident. What I read states the injunction applies to the named plaintiffs and members of the Second Amendment Foundation.
kwc Posted May 20, 2015 at 11:20 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 11:20 PM I'm a member... and would encourage most of you to join, too. They're doing great work.
kwc Posted May 20, 2015 at 11:36 PM Posted May 20, 2015 at 11:36 PM I tweeted Emily Miller about the handgun registration requirement. Her interpretation is that non-residents ARE required to register in the District.
rubicon Posted May 21, 2015 at 01:32 AM Author Posted May 21, 2015 at 01:32 AM I'm a member... and would encourage most of you to join, too. They're doing great work.Life Member of both SAF and CCRKBA and Donate another $100.00...every time they Win! It is an expensive habit...they win a lot!
skinnyb82 Posted May 22, 2015 at 09:00 PM Posted May 22, 2015 at 09:00 PM Lanier is on record stating she's complied with the order and stripped the good cause requirement from applications. Then she went and stated that the majority of DC residents supported the may issue law and she hasn't denied many people. 100 applicants or so, wow holy bleep what a rush to RKBA, but she wouldn't state how many applications she's denied. DC could appeal the interlocutory order. But it's not appealing, presumably waiting for final judgment to perfect the record of appeal. And Todd is correct. If SCOTUS finds the Full Faith and Credit Clause applies to gay marriage, it can't be selectively applied to cases like carry outside the home. Each state as well as the federal government should be required to recognize a permit from another state, same argument that pro-gay marriage activisits have used. I'd pay money to see the liberals have puppies if gay marriage is "legalized" and same arguments are used in a reciprocity challenge.
tkroenlein Posted May 22, 2015 at 11:20 PM Posted May 22, 2015 at 11:20 PM I'll take Full Faith and Credit reviewed under strict scrutiny for $1000, Alex.
C0untZer0 Posted May 23, 2015 at 02:01 AM Posted May 23, 2015 at 02:01 AM If SCOTUS finds the Full Faith and Credit Clause applies to gay marriage, it can't be selectively applied to cases like carry outside the home. Each state as well as the federal government should be required to recognize a permit from another state, same argument that pro-gay marriage activisits have used. That would be great if we had the logical contiguous case law of textual jurisprudence, but instead we have the wacky world of illogical contradictory outcome-based jurisprudence. I wouldn't expect liberal judges to apply the principal of full faith and credit to Second Amendment issues. They don't apply the 14th Amendment when it so clearly applies. They use all sorts of contorted logic to not apply intermediate scrutiny when it so clearly applies. I just wouldn't hold my breath waiting for full faith and credit to become a powerful logical argument for Second Amendment issues.
press1280 Posted May 23, 2015 at 02:06 PM Posted May 23, 2015 at 02:06 PM As far as the 100 applications, last I read she was still sitting on around half the applications. I'm very curious whether she'll let those straight through or not. My guess is she'll hold them as long as possible (the DC law is vague and doesn't appear to have a drop-dead time limit) until the council decides what to do (almost certain they'll ask for a stay from the DC Circuit since Scullin will probably deny).And why only 100 appllications you might ask? Of course, because the process is so arduous and not many want to put up money when DC can simply deny them. I would apply but will not until the "good cause" issue is dead and gone. I think it's maybe 50-50 chances at the DC Circuit.
kwc Posted May 28, 2015 at 03:45 PM Posted May 28, 2015 at 03:45 PM Just saw that D.C. was ordered to begin issuing permits IMMEDIATELY. D.C. had balked and requested a stay, SAF objected, and Judge Scullin this morning ordered them to comply. Another victory!
ming Posted May 28, 2015 at 04:23 PM Posted May 28, 2015 at 04:23 PM Just saw that D.C. was ordered to begin issuing permits IMMEDIATELY. D.C. had balked and requested a stay, SAF objected, and Judge Scullin this morning ordered them to comply. Another victory!Where did you see this?
kwc Posted May 28, 2015 at 04:25 PM Posted May 28, 2015 at 04:25 PM Just saw that D.C. was ordered to begin issuing permits IMMEDIATELY. D.C. had balked and requested a stay, SAF objected, and Judge Scullin this morning ordered them to comply. Another victory! Where did you see this? https://twitter.com/aarmark/status/603947542930300928
chislinger Posted May 28, 2015 at 05:51 PM Posted May 28, 2015 at 05:51 PM Scullin cracking the whip!
kwc Posted May 28, 2015 at 05:52 PM Posted May 28, 2015 at 05:52 PM SAF's press release is here: http://www.saf.org/?p=6244
MrTriple Posted May 28, 2015 at 06:08 PM Posted May 28, 2015 at 06:08 PM SAF also asked for the judge to hold DC in contempt, but I think that was before the denial of a stay by Scullin.
domin8 Posted May 30, 2015 at 06:38 AM Posted May 30, 2015 at 06:38 AM I've already looked into obtaining training for the DC permit. An instructor with a similar address to the NRA HQ is listed. Looks like I have another reason to go to the NRA HQ.
domin8 Posted May 30, 2015 at 06:40 AM Posted May 30, 2015 at 06:40 AM Keep an eye on the whole gay marriage issue as if they rule on the full faith and credit clause applies, it willmget real interesting on carry licenses Sounds like you want a nonresident in some state to get busted like Sheneen, or whatever her name is, from PA and busted in NJ, and the case gets taken all the way to SCOTUS. Then, I begin wondering why that case didn't become our test case.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.