« Chicago digs in its heels | Main | Spam King kills wife, daughter, self »
Post-Heller roundup
In the Washington Times, Jacob Sullum argues "D.C.'s political leaders know they are inviting another Second Amendment lawsuit, but they are determined to defy the Supreme Court and the Constitution for as long as possible."
While the Washington Post upbraids Congress for considering legislation affecting DC's new laws: "DISTRICT residents are sadly accustomed to congressional interference in their affairs. Usually, the meddling comes in a bid to overturn local legislation."
Rather strange, since the Post otherwise supports Congress "meddling" in State and local affairs. I guess it just figures Congress should control everything except the federally-owned enclave where Congress sits.
And the LA Times notes that DC residents still can't buy guns. The Gun Control Act of 1968 forbids them to buy handguns in Maryland, VA, and other States, and the DC government hasn't promulgated regulations on purchasing guns. (I wonder if it has to. The ban was a ban on registrations, overlaid on an existing registration system. Unless the registration system had some ban on sales, too, there would be no regulations necessary to allow a sale).
Hat tip to Dan Gifford.
10 Comments | Leave a comment
I love this quote from the LA times story.
"As he walked his dog in the Dupont Circle neighborhood Tuesday evening, another city resident, Costa Tsantalis said that he once opposed the gun ban -- but that was before he was a police officer in Norfolk, Va.
"I used to say, 'We should let the good guys have them, too,' " Tsantalis said as his Rhodesian ridgeback-pit bull mix eyed a squirrel. "But just seeing the staggering stupidity of people and their inability to control themselves, even good people, changed my mind."
Still, he said, he wants to buy a handgun for self-defense as soon as the law allows"
Wow.
And we know there is a ffl dealer in DC :)
Has the one licensed firearms dealer in DC been refusing to sell handguns?
Is that "legal"?
I've said it before, I will say it again, these issues will require a judicially appointed Special Master in order for compliance to be assured. It is practically a forgone conclusion in civil rights litigation.
What about a person moving into the district with a handgun lawfully purchased in his previous state of residence?
What about a gift from a friend outside DC? What about a private purchase by a DC resident from a private party near DC? What about people buying a gun in a private purchase in a nearby state and saying that they had already possessed the gun illegally so they can take advantage of the amnesty. What will this do for the value of used handguns in the area surrounding DC?
David E. Young: The one FFL in D.C. (out of six, including the ATF) willing to deal with the public lost his lease, so he's waiting on both ATF and D.C. licenses for his new location. One account (from the radio station, as I remember) says that D.C. is not exactly rushing to accommodate, we'll see soon enough.
He doesn't want to keep an inventory of handguns---I can understand that---and says he'll do transfers by appointment, but of course he first needs resolution of all the red tape.
- Harold
Harold:
Thanks for those details. I was unaware of most of them. My comment was intended to be somewhat sarcastic and related to the previous one, which, if not mistaken, was a reference to a certain gun control advocate.
David E. Young: I thought that might be the case, but it wasn't 100% clear, and you gave me an opening to relate some moderately obscure info which will show us just how serious D.C. is about their policy of Massive Resistance (HT the Instapundit for that bit of history).
As for our very favorite FFL in D.C., I've heard---maybe in jest, but I'll bet it's happening regardless---that he's annoyed by people calling asking if he/they'll do transfers ^_^.
- Harold
That WashPo editorial must be one of their poorest yet. But it's hard to decide the worst, given the myriad choices.
"...usurp efforts by Fenty and the D.C. Council to comply with the Supreme Court..."
I will never forget the most outrageous thing I ever heard from a university undergraduate: "What's the least I have to do to get a D-minus." I responded: "The least you have to do to earn an F is to have uttered that question."
Souder is simply giving Fenty/Nickles/Norton their well-earned "F."