D.C. Handgun Law Overturned
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Good Decisions, Guns and Ammo, Law
I certainly wasn’t expecting this on a Friday in March, but it’s a good decision.
March 9 (Bloomberg) — A U.S. appeals court struck down a three-decade-old District of Columbia law that bans residents from keeping a handgun in their homes, saying the Constitution’s Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Washington also threw out a district law requiring registered firearms to be kept disassembled or under trigger lock.
It’s the first time a federal appeals court has struck down a gun-control measure on Second Amendment grounds. Nelson Lund, a constitutional law professor at George Mason University in neighboring Virginia, said an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is “very likely.”
“This is clearly an extremely significant ruling,” Lund said. “The District of Columbia had some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the country.”
I’m not a huge handgun fan, but requiring people to have trigger locks or having the thing disassembled sort of defeats the purpose, yes?
Now, concealment I’m not really okay with, but if somebody wants a gun in their home for protection, that’s their right.
This entry was posted on Friday, March 9th, 2007 and is filed under Good Decisions, Guns and Ammo, Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 9th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
[...] Other Bloggers Weigh In: Taylor Marsh; Wizbang; The Impolitic; Donklephant; QandO [...]
March 9th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
I agree with the Appeals Court. Since other Appeals Court decisions say the opposite, this should be a shoo in for the Supreme Court to make tha decision once & for all.
March 10th, 2007 at 12:32 am
Needless to say, this is a great opinion and reaffirms a fundamental American Right which has been attacked by the nanny-state at every opportunity. I would encourage all to read it. It is available at: http://www.drudgereport.com/04-7041a.pdf
Regardless of whether one is “really okay” with concealment, this opinion clearly lays a legal ground work for conceal carry to protected by the 2nd Amendment.
“First, the word “bear” in this context is simply a more formal synonym for ‘carry’, i.e., ‘Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.” The Oxford Endlish Dictionary and the original Webster’s list the primary meaning of “bear” as “to support” or “to carry.” [citation omitted] Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary-which the Supreme Court often relies upon to ascertain the founding-era understanding of text…is in accord. The first three defintions for “bear” are “to carry as a burden,” “to convey or carry,” and to “carry as mark of authority. [citation ommitted]…It is equally evident from a survey of late eighteenth-and early ninteenth-century state constitutional provisions that the public understanding of “bear Arms” also encompassed the carry of arems for privated purposes such as self-defense.”
Again, this opinion goes as far as ANY in restoring a basic constitutional liberty to We The People. If someone wants to go the grocery store packing heat, that is their RIGHT and ALL statistic show that conceal-carry states have less violent crime rights that the nanny-states.
March 10th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Frankly that photo scares the s!!t out of me.
I know little about “hand-gun” lore and safety, but if it is anything like the training I had with rifles there is one golden rule.
Never play with a rifle (subst. gun).
A five or six year old play-wrestling with an adult for possession of a (hopefully unloaded) gun, with at least one finger of his left hand inside the trigger guard… YIKES!!
I truly hope that he is lucky enough to live to an old age.
March 12th, 2007 at 11:36 am
As a HUGE fan of guns and recreational shooting, I’ll say that
picture scares the Sh!t out of me, too. That is a completely irresponsible adult. That kid will be one of the ones that “accidentally” shoots his buddy when he’s 10.
March 12th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Does anyone have the statistical breakout of deaths by firearms? I would be interested in the percentage of deaths due to accidents, crimes, and rage. The numbers would give me a better sense of the gun ban issue. Thanks.
June 2nd, 2008 at 8:43 pm
I have to agree with ford4×4, even though I am an advocate of concealed carry, unrestricted ownership of firearms by people who are not felons, am saving up for a Barrett Light Fifty and believe that the Second Amendment means what it says. Daddy needs some couch time and there’s a distinct possibility that Sonny needs foster care, at least until Daddy learns the difference between a firearm and a toy.
I also have to say that the picture in question has NOTHING to do with the subject of the post.
June 26th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
SCOTUS UPHOLDS THE CONSTITUTION!
June 27th, 2008
In what has become the typical 5-4 split on the Supreme Court–with 4 conservatives on the good side, 4 liberals on the bad side, and Justice Kennedy swinging in the middle, SCOTUS struck down the D.C. ban on the legal possession of handguns for self-defense. Score one for the good guys! (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080627/D91I48C82.html)
I hope someone is keeping tally on the D.C. crime rate. If it goes up, watch for headlines, prime time specials, and rallies for new gun laws. If the crime rate goes down, watch for no media coverage. I’m betting on a plunging crime rate as Joe Average D.C. Citizen starts packing a weapon to ward off the already-armed reprobates.
One can only hope that the next Court sees a few more conservatives who just may determine there is no “right to privacy” in the Constitution and overturn Roe V. Wade. One can always dream, no?
Tags: CRIME RATE, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, GUNS, SCOTUS, SECOND AMENDMENT