0
   

LIBERTY FOR THE CITIZENS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

 
 
Reply Fri 30 Apr, 2010 09:21 pm
Friday April 30, 2010

This week, Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Jon. Tester (D-Mont.),
and Reps. Travis Childers (D-Miss.) and Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.),
introduced the “Second Amendment Enforcement Act.” The Senate
and House bills (S. 3265, with 14 Senate cosponsors and H.R. 5162,
with 64 House co-sponsors, respectively) would eliminate several of
the District’s most restrictive gun control laws passed in the wake of
the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller.


“We believe that residents across this country should be able to
exercise their constitutional right to have access to firearms to
protect themselves,” Sen. McCain said. Sen. Tester added,
“This legislation sends a clear message: Washington, D.C., isn’t an
exception when it comes to law-abiding folks and their Second Amendment rights.”
Rep. Childers noted, “Today’s legislation seeks to secure for District residents
the rights reinforced by the Supreme Court’s decision in Heller.”


The bills would abolish the District’s deliberately difficult and costly
firearm registration requirement, its restrictions on carrying a firearm
for protection on private property, its post-Heller ban on hundreds of
types of semi-automatic firearms denigrated as “assault weapons,”
its ban on standard defensive magazines that hold more than 10 rounds,
and its California-style “microstamping” law and handgun "roster" system.


Anticipating continuing efforts by the D.C. Council to suppress gun ownership
by preventing dealers from conducting business in the District,
the bills also provide for D.C. residents to legally buy handguns from FFLs
in Maryland and Virginia, and they prescribe reasonable conditions
for the lawful transportation of firearms within the District.


Furthermore, because the city’s elected officials have demonstrated
hostility toward the Second Amendment"imposing its “microstamping” law,
“assault weapon” ban, ban on magazines holding over 10 rounds,
and “unsafe handgun” ban (which the city modified after the ban
was challenged in court)"the Childers and McCain bills prohibit the
city from enacting new laws designed to thwart the exercise of the right to arms.


NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox declared NRA’s support for
the Childers-Souder and McCain-Tester bills, noting that NRA
“remains committed to restoring the right to self-defense for citizens
in Washington, D.C., by whatever legal or legislative means necessary.”


Not everyone views the new legislation so favorably, however.
In a press release, D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) derided
the “new and more dangerous National Rifle Association gun amendment” (sic)
because it would allow the city to regulate, but not prohibit,
the carrying of firearms. (In Heller, the Supreme Court recognized
that the Second Amendment “guarantee[s] the individual right to
possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”)

From the NRA INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 716 • Replies: 6
No top replies

 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 01:54 pm
One should note that if one is serious about "liberty" for the citizens of the District of Columbia one ought to support home rule for the District as well as support the ability of the elected House Rep to vote in Congress. Unless these are done no amount of guns can provide the "liberty" for the citizens of the District of Columbia.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 03:11 pm
@kuvasz,
kuvasz wrote:
One should note that if one is serious about "liberty" for the citizens of the District of Columbia one ought to support home rule for the District as well as support the ability of the elected House Rep to vote in Congress. Unless these are done no amount of guns can provide the "liberty" for the citizens of the District of Columbia.
It is a matter of SUBORDINATING the collective to the rights of the INDIVIDUAL,
which outrank democracy, outrank the collective.

Government has NO JURISDICTION to interfere
in personal bearing of defensive guns.

Government was given permission to EXIST,
subject to certain considerations, including THAT one.





David
kuvasz
 
  2  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 05:16 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Let us be clear about your sentiment. Do you care more about carrying around weapons or that adult Americans are denied their natural right to be represented in Congress with a vote?

OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 06:40 pm
@kuvasz,
kuvasz wrote:
Let us be clear about your sentiment.
Clarity is good.



kuvasz wrote:
Do you care more about carrying around weapons or that adult Americans
are denied their natural right to be represented in Congress with a vote?
1. I care much more about their ability to defend their lives and their property from predatory violence.
That is literally a matter of life and death.


2. I see no "right" in the residents of Washington DC to be represented in Congress.
No one has to live there if he does not want to; its not a prison; no walls around it.


3. I make no distinction qua voting rights based on age.
Morally, a citizen of any age has the right to vote
if he is held to obay the law.





David
Always Eleven to him
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 07:14 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
2. I see no "right" in the residents of Washington DC to be represented in Congress. No one has to live there if he does not want to; its not a prison; no walls around it.
/quote]

I think you've missed the point. The citizens of the District of Columbia are first and foremost citizens of the United States. Every other United States citizen is represented in Congress.

If you recognize a citizen's right to own firearms, why do you not recognize the right of a citizen to be represented by a full voting member of Congress?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 11:00 pm
@Always Eleven to him,
David wrote:
2. I see no "right" in the residents of Washington DC to be represented in Congress.
No one has to live there if he does not want to; its not a prison; no walls around it.
Always Eleven to him wrote:
I think you've missed the point.
The citizens of the District of Columbia are first and foremost citizens of the United States.
Every other United States citizen is represented in Congress.

If you recognize a citizen's right to own firearms,
why do you not recognize the right of a citizen to be represented
by a full voting member of Congress?
Its a matter of simple definition rendered by the US Constitution, which is the Supreme Law of the Land.
The Constitutional set-up does not provide for representation
in Congress from other than States of America.

If u believe that it DOES, then please quote the operative language,
or at least cite to the Article and Section wherein this theory is supported.

In my opinion, an amendment of the Constitution woud probably be necessary to accomplish this result.
Admittedly, I have not scrutinized the Constitution concerning this point because I don't care much about it.
I might be in factual error.

As to my recognition of a citizen's right to own firearms,
it IS clearly set forth in the 2nd Amendment that government has no jurisdiction with respect
to any citizen 's right to bear arms. Remember: when the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791,
there were NO police anywhere in the USA,
nor were there any in England until the next century.
Every citizen was expected to defend his own life and property
from the predatory violence of man or beast; it was assumed that he 'd have the means to do it.

In summary:
no vote for D.C. residents because that was not how Congress was set up,
and
full freedom to keep and bear arms because the Constitution said so. (2nd Amendment; also the 9th Amendment)

It is only a question of reading the Constitution like a roadmap
and applying it strictly and mechanically.
U don 't argue with a roadmap; u read it and u follow it.





David

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Drumsticks - Discussion by H2O MAN
nobody respects an oath breaker - Discussion by gungasnake
Marksmanship - Discussion by H2O MAN
Kids and Guns by the Numbers - Discussion by jcboy
Personal Defense Weapons (PDW) - Discussion by H2O MAN
Self defense with a gun - Discussion by H2O MAN
It's a sellers market - Discussion by H2O MAN
Harrisburg Pa. Outdoor Show "Postponed" - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » LIBERTY FOR THE CITIZENS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/20/2024 at 09:47:55