Damn Washington DC still at it!!!

5.56X45mm

Milforum Mac Daddy
DC tightens gun rules after landmark court ruling


By The Associated Press, Tuesday, December 16, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The District of Columbia Council passed more regulations for gun owners Tuesday, months after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the city's 32-year-old handgun ban.

Among other things, the bill requires gun owners to register their weapons every three years and receive training by a certified firearms instructor.
"This bill will be, I think, one of the most progressive registration laws in the country," Council member Phil Mendelson said.

The National Rifle Association accused the city of forcing residents to jump through unnecessary hurdles, thereby undermining the intent of the Supreme Court's ruling in June that affirmed the right of Americans to keep guns in the home for self defense.

"The D.C. Council continues to try to make it harder and harder for law-abiding citizens to access this freedom," NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said.

In September, the House passed an NRA-backed bill that would have essentially stripped the city of its ability to regulate firearms, but the measure died in the Senate.

D.C. leaders say they are trying to be respectful of the Supreme Court case while doing everything they can to enact strict gun control measures in a city where gun violence is common.

"No constitutional right is absolute, nor is this right to possess a gun in the home for self defense," said councilwoman Mary Cheh, a law professor at George Washington University.

Since the handgun ban was overturned, the council has passed legislation allowing residents to own most semiautomatic pistols while banning magazines capable of firing more than 10 rounds. Registration also is limited to one pistol a month, and gun owners face prosecution if they fail to keep loaded weapons away from children.

Tuesday's bill builds on those regulations. It requires gun owners to spend at least one hour at the firing range and four hours in the classroom with an instructor before registration. The bill also requires a criminal background check for gun owners every six years.

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All right reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed
Once again... let me point out the damn issue here...

"No constitutional right is absolute, nor is this right to possess a gun in the home for self defense," said councilwoman Mary Cheh, a law professor at George Washington University.
Remember... the Pittsburgh City Council also shares a similar view on Constitutional Rights.

"Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?" said Councilwoman Tonya Payne, a supporter. "This is what's right to do, and if this means that we have to go out and have a court battle, then that's fine ... We have plenty of dead bodies coming up in our streets every single day, and that is unacceptable."


Original Source
icon_smile_angry.gif
What else can I say !!
icon_smile_angry.gif


These people want to strip us of our rights. PERIOD!

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE ABSOLUTE! They given to us by all might God/Ahllah/Budda/Birth/etc... They are rights that we are born with and die with.

Truly America has entered a dark age.... I fear that within four years my Nation and my freedoms will be but a thing of the past.
 
Among other things, the bill requires gun owners to register their weapons every three years and receive training by a certified firearms instructor.

The National Rifle Association accused the city of forcing residents to jump through unnecessary hurdles, thereby undermining the intent of the Supreme Court's ruling in
June that affirmed the right of Americans to keep guns in the home for self defense.

"The D.C. Council continues to try to make it harder and harder for law-abiding citizens to access this freedom," NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said

I think that making people actually practice with their fire arm isn't so bad at all. What infringment is the NRA talking about. It isn't like you have to make a written exam, isn't it? Perhaps they should do so, it would prevent a lot of damage:

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/04/brother_shoots_11yearold_siste.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3733021

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1304235,man-shoots-self-thanksgiving-gathering-112808.article

Really the list is endless... ask Cheney what his point of view is. I like to approach this on a more mathematical way, it takes out the controversial, emotional side of this story. Guns + a lot of stupid/ careless people = death. Since you can't take stupidity out of the equation, guns are thus the obvious choice. Or you don't mind that a lot of people die or maimed.
 
I hate this new movement where towns and states pass laws that they know are unconstitutional. Mike Church on Sirius radio does a good job on exposing such things. For these types of people, the constitution means nothing.
 
I think that making people actually practice with their fire arm isn't so bad at all. What infringment is the NRA talking about. It isn't like you have to make a written exam, isn't it? Perhaps they should do so, it would prevent a lot of damage:

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/04/brother_shoots_11yearold_siste.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3733021

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1304235,man-shoots-self-thanksgiving-gathering-112808.article

Really the list is endless... ask Cheney what his point of view is. I like to approach this on a more mathematical way, it takes out the controversial, emotional side of this story. Guns + a lot of stupid/ careless people = death. Since you can't take stupidity out of the equation, guns are thus the obvious choice. Or you don't mind that a lot of people die or maimed.

This isn't about proficiency.
This isn't about having to take a written exam every 3 years.

This is about the city council throwing a tantrum.
Their agenda was smacked down so they are trying to do an end run by requiring things that while not difficult are inconvenient. Having to pay for a training course every 3 years seems a little excessive. They should prove they have had some level of training before they buy the gun.

"Guns + a lot of stupid/ careless people = death. Since you can't take stupidity out of the equation, guns are thus the obvious choice. Or you don't mind that a lot of people die or maimed." THIS STATEMENT IS THE ROOT OF PROBLEM. In America you are free to be stupid. It boils down to personal responsibility. The gun ban crowd wants to protect everyone from everything.

Since you say you like mathematics. Let me throw some statistics at you.
Source: http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm

There has been no statistically significant reduction in violent crime since the 1976 Gun Ban.

Even considering that DC had nearly 30 years to work, DC leads the nation in murder, robbery, and aggrivated assault in the last 3 years. Bear in mind that DC is 50th (out of 51) in total population.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/US_States_Rate_Ranking.html

I'm tired of everyone constantly saying that gun control is the answer. It is not. Personal accountability and enforcement of existing laws is.
 
There has been no statistically significant reduction in violent crime since the 1976 Gun Ban.

Well, that is obvious. You can get your gun anywhere and take it to DC. These statistics would help if DC were to be locked off from the outside world. Then it would be reasonably objective.

But I do agree with you about accountability. But that is just like with communism. It's a great concept but it doesn't work when humans get involved.
 
In most cases eliminating one problem only creates another. So says the Law of Unintended consequences.

This is a great article that discusses the flawed thinking of the gun ban crowd.
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/flawed1.htm

Clearly the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Ammendment to that act in 1997 have done nothing to reduce both general crime rates or illegal gun crimes.

From the above reference
"The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 has been very successful in significantly reducing legally held handguns from circulation but it has no effect on those illegally held." — Police Superintendents' Association, Humberside Branch.
 
Passing unconstitutional laws makes for bad precedence. And you know how that is important in the American legal system (I say "legal" and not "justice" for a very obvious reason).
 
In most cases eliminating one problem only creates another. So says the Law of Unintended consequences.

This is a great article that discusses the flawed thinking of the gun ban crowd.
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/flawed1.htm

Clearly the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Ammendment to that act in 1997 have done nothing to reduce both general crime rates or illegal gun crimes.

From the above reference
"The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 has been very successful in significantly reducing legally held handguns from circulation but it has no effect on those illegally held." — Police Superintendents' Association, Humberside Branch.

It is a matter of record, that since the concealed carry laws were implemented in various states in the US, crime has dropped considerably, it is also a matter of record, in South Africa and UK, since restrictive gun laws were put in place, crime has sky rocketed.

A report from the US where criminals were interviewed in prisons, when asked “What is your greatest fear when carrying out crime?” 100% answered “Armed civilians.”

Professor John Lotts book, “More guns = Less crime” should be required reading for all politicions. Professor Lott carried out proper and unbiased research and was surprised with his findings.

Anti gun organisations enjoy no membership support and are funded by such people as billionaire George Soros. The Rowtree Foundation in UK has recently pulled all financial support from Gun Free South Africa causing closure of offices in various cities around the country. Gun Free South Africa's so called research has on every occasion been shown to be complete and utter fabrication and propaganda.

Recently Gun Free South Africa headed a campaign for people to put “Gun Free Zone” signs in homes, offices and cars. I really couldn't help myself, so I emailed GFSA along the following lines:-

“Thank you for a superb idea, I put a Gun Free Zone sign in the window of my home as you suggested, within 24 hours an armed criminal broke into my home. I ordered him to give himself up, but he shot at me. I returned fire and killed him with my 45. Thanks to your wonderful campaign, another criminal is off the streets. I cannot thank you enough.”

Needless to say I didn't get a reply.
 
It's a feel good thing. Remember most of these guys live in walled villas where they're protected by 24 hour security.
 
Is there any other kind of security?

I would have to say "No."

My concern is that the governement will work to take away our right to own and carry a littel bit at a time. The public seems to be able to tolerate small changes. Before you realize what is happening, the government has outlawed firearms (except for themselves) and the public is powerless against the government. Just getting tired of the anti gun hipocracy.
 
Back
Top