DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 8
- Posts: 5052
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: DFW Area, TX
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Well. I am standing by to apply for mine soon.
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 4339
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Thanks. That makes sense in general terms.srothstein wrote:This is my understanding of how it works, with the standard disclaimer that IANAL.Soccerdad1995 wrote:Here's what I don't understand. Hopefully one of our resident lawyers can edumicate me a bit.
A lower court rules that parts of President Trump's travel ban are unconstitutional. So those parts get put on hold until the case is resolved, 6+ months later.
A lower court rules that parts of DC gun restrictions are unconstitutional. Yet those parts stay in force pending the eventual resolution of the case.
Setting aside who is right and who is wrong, in both cases we have a court deciding that the government is acting in an unconstitutional manner. And in both cases, that allegedly unconstitutional behavior is causing irreparable harm to the people. So why do we allow that harm to continue, pending final resolution, in one case and not in the other?
In any case where the court is asked for temporary restraining order, the court looks at two things. The first is whether or not the petitioner has a reasonable chance of winning the case. If not, no order. Then they ask which causes the greater potential harm - allowing the act or allowing the order. The TRO is granted if the harm is greater when the act is allowed than when it is stopped.
So, in the case of the immigration ban, the court decided that there was a good chance that Trump's order was illegal and that there was more harm to society by allowing it to take effect. In the case of the guns, they decided there was a good chance of winning, but that the harm to citizens was minimal if the law stayed in effect instead of being overturned immediately.
But I can not fathom how any reasonable person could think that denial of a fundamental human right causes "minimal" harm. The right to own the means for self defense is key to a person's very survival. It is a necessary tool to protect our inalienable right to life, and also to liberty. To me, the right of foreign citizens to visit the U.S. certainly pales in comparison. I would place the importance of the RKBA above the importance of free speech, free exercise of religion, and the right to vote. Others may disagree. But saying that there is more harm done by not letting you go on vacation or visit relatives in the US than there is by forcing you to be a defenseless victim? That defies logic, IMHO.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 6745
- Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:16 am
- Location: Hunt County
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
ELB wrote:SCOTUS is not getting this one: DC won't take concealed carry fight to Supreme Court
So, they admit it's not a matter of right or wrong, it's a political issue.The argument against taking the case to the Supreme Court is based on concerns by gun-control advocates that an unfavorable ruling by the nation’s highest court could nullify conceal-carry restrictions in states across the country, including Maryland.
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 821
- Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:57 am
- Location: San Antonio
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Politics over right and wrong? No offense, but your naivete is showing. They're not out to do good. They're out to win. They've had a setback, not a permanent defeat.Pawpaw wrote:So, they admit it's not a matter of right or wrong, it's a political issue.
-
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:21 pm
- Location: North Texas
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Isn't there another similar case floating out in one of the other circuits right now?KLB wrote:Politics over right and wrong? No offense, but your naivete is showing. They're not out to do good. They're out to win. They've had a setback, not a permanent defeat.Pawpaw wrote:So, they admit it's not a matter of right or wrong, it's a political issue.
TSRA Member since 5/30/15; NRA Member since 10/31/14
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 6745
- Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:16 am
- Location: Hunt County
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
I'm not the least bit naive. The only thing new here is their admitting it.KLB wrote:Politics over right and wrong? No offense, but your naivete is showing. They're not out to do good. They're out to win. They've had a setback, not a permanent defeat.Pawpaw wrote:So, they admit it's not a matter of right or wrong, it's a political issue.
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 4339
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
So if DC is not planning to appeal the decision then what is the basis for a stay? Or am I mistaken and DC needs to start issuing permits today without requiring one to show "cause"?
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Interesting. So they are scared that they would lose, so they just give up on the “good reason” for DC. I wonder if all the other states that have similar restrictions will get challenged now?ELB wrote:SCOTUS is not getting this one: DC won't take concealed carry fight to Supreme Court
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 7863
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
- Location: Richmond, Texas
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
I do believe that Kommiefornia has the same requirement. I seemto recall the requirement when I tried to get a permit in Contra Costa County.CZp10 wrote:Interesting. So they are scared that they would lose, so they just give up on the “good reason” for DC. I wonder if all the other states that have similar restrictions will get challenged now?ELB wrote:SCOTUS is not getting this one: DC won't take concealed carry fight to Supreme Court
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh
"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 4143
- Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
- Location: Northern DFW
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Maryland has a "good and substantial" requirement while New York has a "special need for self-protection" Of all the things that are blatantly um-Constitutional, these seem to stand out. I think that both States use those as reasons to deny reciprocity so they go well beyond restricting their own citizens. Maryland is a thorn in my side personally because on a 1,500 mile trip from Texas to Pennsylvania, there is a 12 mile stretch of I-81 in Maryland to requires me to stop and deal with my EDC. I would love to see some case that gets to SCOTUS the extends Heller outside the home. Since Peruta didn't make it, I was hoping that this one would. I do recognize the danger of the wrong case doing substantial harm.anygunanywhere wrote:I do believe that Kommiefornia has the same requirement. I seem to recall the requirement when I tried to get a permit in Contra Costa County.CZp10 wrote:Interesting. So they are scared that they would lose, so they just give up on the “good reason” for DC. I wonder if all the other states that have similar restrictions will get challenged now?ELB wrote:SCOTUS is not getting this one: DC won't take concealed carry fight to Supreme Court
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dum Spiro, Spero
Dum Spiro, Spero
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 8
- Posts: 5052
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: DFW Area, TX
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
I don't think there is a stay any more. I went to the DCPD web site and they basically said they were accepting applications. I am going to be doing some business soon in the DC/VA area, so I am going to apply while I'm up there. There is a list of approved instructors (many in VA) and you can submit your application, then you have 45 days to finish the class. It will be very cool to legally carry a concealed handgun on the DC metro from Virginia to the District and walk around the District. Just need to be careful of Maryland. And, alas I will be working in the Pentagon and the Border Patrol headquarters most of the time, which are prohibited federal buildings, although I can leave in the car in the parking lot of CBP building. Not sure about the Pentagon, but I'll be riding the Metro to both, so I won't get to carry.Soccerdad1995 wrote:So if DC is not planning to appeal the decision then what is the basis for a stay? Or am I mistaken and DC needs to start issuing permits today without requiring one to show "cause"?
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 649
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:36 pm
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Carry by licensees on any public transportation in DC is prohibited, according to handgunlaw.usScottDLS wrote:It will be very cool to legally carry a concealed handgun on the DC metro from Virginia to the District and walk around the District.
http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/dc.pdf
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 8
- Posts: 5052
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: DFW Area, TX
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
That is incorrect, if you have a VA CHP you can carry on the Virginia side and presumably if you had a DC permit you could carry there too.CleverNickname wrote:Carry by licensees on any public transportation in DC is prohibited, according to handgunlaw.usScottDLS wrote:It will be very cool to legally carry a concealed handgun on the DC metro from Virginia to the District and walk around the District.
http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/dc.pdf
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 649
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:36 pm
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
Obviously DC law doesn't apply in Virginia. Notice I said:ScottDLS wrote:That is incorrect, if you have a VA CHP you can carry on the Virginia side and presumably if you had a DC permit you could carry there too.CleverNickname wrote:Carry by licensees on any public transportation in DC is prohibited, according to handgunlaw.usScottDLS wrote:It will be very cool to legally carry a concealed handgun on the DC metro from Virginia to the District and walk around the District.
http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/dc.pdf
They have the DC law listed right there in the PDF, so unless you have something that says differently (other than your presumption), I think they're correct.CleverNickname wrote:Carry by licensees on any public transportation in DC is prohibited
Re: DC: Fed Court of Appeals rules public carry of firearms a "core" right
I really would like for you to be correct on this and hope you are for your sake if you do carry on the DC metrorail or any other DC public transportation system. However, I am unable to find anything to corroborate your assertion that it is legal. What are you basing your, at this point, opinion that it is legal if one has a concealed permit for DC?ScottDLS wrote:That is incorrect, if you have a VA CHP you can carry on the Virginia side and presumably if you had a DC permit you could carry there too.CleverNickname wrote:Carry by licensees on any public transportation in DC is prohibited, according to handgunlaw.usScottDLS wrote:It will be very cool to legally carry a concealed handgun on the DC metro from Virginia to the District and walk around the District.
http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/dc.pdf
I do note that you say "presumably."
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider