Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« British press stepping up drumbeat for knife control | Main | Debate over the world post-Heller »

Heller registers his revolver

Posted by David Hardy · 18 July 2008 11:59 AM

Story at Reason Online. Like others, written by someone with only modest knowledge of firearms.

· Parker v. DC

7 Comments | Leave a comment

sgtlmj | July 18, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply

[quote]...carrying his 1911 single-action Colt .22 revolver in a cherry-red vinyl case.[/quote]

LOL! That must be a rare piece!


JT | July 18, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply

My post elsewhere after reading the WaPo article in detail:

Link
Long story short:
- you have to bring the gun you want to register WITH you (so it can be inspected, test-fired, etc.)
- Heller owns a 1911 semi-auto and a .22 revolver
- he wanted to register the semi-auto but didn't bring it with him
- he didn't bring it with him because it's defined as being illegal (it's branded a "machine gun" because it's capable of accepting a magazine larger than 12 rounds)
- the Asst. Police Chief flat-out stated that anyone bringing a 12+ round weapon in will have it confiscated and perhaps the owner will be charged with a crime

Ergo:

A registration for a semi-automatic still has yet to be rejected (which would, presumably, be the only thing that would grant one standing to sue), because the city won't even START the process of registration without the gun showing up in the hands of the registrant, and since semi-autos are illegal it appears that someone will actually have to get ARRESTED and charged for possession of a semi-auto (which will obviously get confiscated) before they MIGHT actually have standing to sue to reverse the semi-auto ban-by-definition.

Awesome.

Critic | July 18, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply

If you show up and ask to register a Beretta and they tell you no, then I would think that would suffice to establish standing even if it wasn't in writing. You asked for a permit and were refused. That's all it takes isn't it. Or maybe I'm applying common sense to a situation that makes no sense.

Don Gwinn | July 18, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply

I would think Critic is right here . . . David would know. But Heller wasn't arrested for anything the first time, right? He still had standing.

Poshboy | July 18, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply

Given that people never read the newspapers or can be absolutely clueless at times, you can bet that someone will show up at MPD with a semi-auto pistol and have it confiscated, not knowing the nuances of DC policy and firearms law like we do.

Sebastian | July 18, 2008 11:40 PM | Reply

IIRC, Heller had his application rejected by the DC police, which is what gave him standing to take the case forward. I guess now they've set up a nice solution to that problem from their point of view. They have to see the gun before you can apply to register the firearm. So yeah, if you want to challenge this law, it seems you'd have to be willing to lose the gun and risk getting prosecuted.

k_semler | July 19, 2008 12:22 AM | Reply

The provisions of this bill as stated above seem strikingly similar to the provisions of the 1937 marihuana tax act. (you have to get a tax stamp to possess MJ; but to get the tax stamp, you have to have the MJ in possession, which is a violation of law, and self-incrimination).

The Marihuana Tax Act was overturned in 1969 in Leary v. United States due to it being in direct conflict with the fifth amendment to the United States constitution, since a person seeking the MJ tax stamp would be required to incriminate himself)

Leave a comment