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

« ATF has trouble with its own records | Main | Fellow arrested during DNC convention released »

House passes bill cutting back DC gun laws

Posted by David Hardy · 17 September 2008 10:11 AM

Story here. As predicted, the mushy version went down in flames, and the stronger one passed 266-152. From here it goes to the Senate, with uncertain results.

Hat tip to reader Ambiguous Ambiguae...

· Heller aftermath

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Critic | September 17, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply

here's a link to the text of the bill referred to in the AP article.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6691:
I don't know how up to date it is.

I see a big problem with it. Section 3 reads in part:

"Nothing ... shall authorize ... the District of Columbia to ... unduly burden ... persons ... possessing firearms..."

The problem is that DC has a dramatically different idea of what "unduly burden" means, and apparently they can still make laws burdening the right to arms.

PeterT | September 18, 2008 7:00 AM | Reply

Now if they were to strike the word 'unduly', they might have something there.....

Leave a comment