The freedom haters in the Washington D.C. municipal government have written up a new law in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Heller. This law is crafted to comply with the narrowest interpretation of the Supreme Court's ruling and everyone involved agrees that this law probably does not comply, and there will be years of further litigation. Short of overt corruption and embezzlement, intentionally crafting unconstitutional laws is the most obvious violation of public trust a local government can engage in. These officials are dedicating the taxes of the people of D.C. for years to come in defense of their own belligerence. Their plan is to keep writing unconstitutional legislation that barely complies with the narrowest reading of each loss they suffer, presumably until they stop loosing or those fighting for freedom and our God given rights give up from fatigue.
The law they have written partially complies with the ruling in Heller depending on how much of it you read. The decision says an individual has the right to own a handgun for self defense, so the D.C. freedom haters have decided to allow some kinds of hand guns but not semi-automatics. That is in direct defiance of the part of Heller that says a weapon must be "unusual and dangerous" to be banned. Like most legal phrases that may seem vague but even a cursory glance at past Supreme Court rulings on firearms one will see this language occur and be defined.
The second part of the ruling that the D.C. legislation deliberately flaunts is that the requirement of trigger locks is also unconstitutional because it eliminates the possibility of self defense. You and I understand this as a pragmatic concern. If someone has broken into your home and is threatening you with lethal force you don't have time to find your keys and unlock your gun. D.C. has instead chosen to interpret this as meaning that the Supreme Court objected to the fact that the old D.C. gun ban would have punished someone for unlocking the gun to defend themselves when in immanent danger. So their response is to continue to require gun locks but write an exception where one will not be punished only if there is an immediate lethal threat to the person and only within their home. D.C. Attorney General Peter Nichols said, "We do not want people running around with loaded guns outside." Which shows that in D.C. they are still confusing law abiding citizens with murderous criminals. Its as if everyone is blind to the fact that a thirty year gun ban has done nothing to stop gun violence and that last summer reached a new record in murders for the District.
The law they have written partially complies with the ruling in Heller depending on how much of it you read. The decision says an individual has the right to own a handgun for self defense, so the D.C. freedom haters have decided to allow some kinds of hand guns but not semi-automatics. That is in direct defiance of the part of Heller that says a weapon must be "unusual and dangerous" to be banned. Like most legal phrases that may seem vague but even a cursory glance at past Supreme Court rulings on firearms one will see this language occur and be defined.
The second part of the ruling that the D.C. legislation deliberately flaunts is that the requirement of trigger locks is also unconstitutional because it eliminates the possibility of self defense. You and I understand this as a pragmatic concern. If someone has broken into your home and is threatening you with lethal force you don't have time to find your keys and unlock your gun. D.C. has instead chosen to interpret this as meaning that the Supreme Court objected to the fact that the old D.C. gun ban would have punished someone for unlocking the gun to defend themselves when in immanent danger. So their response is to continue to require gun locks but write an exception where one will not be punished only if there is an immediate lethal threat to the person and only within their home. D.C. Attorney General Peter Nichols said, "We do not want people running around with loaded guns outside." Which shows that in D.C. they are still confusing law abiding citizens with murderous criminals. Its as if everyone is blind to the fact that a thirty year gun ban has done nothing to stop gun violence and that last summer reached a new record in murders for the District.
The extent to which D.C. will register lawfully owned guns is obscene as well. My favorite part of the hubris of these freedom haters is that they have generously decided not to prosecute anyone who was previously in violation of the unconstitutional law, but only if they come forth and register their guns as soon as possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment