D.C. Repeals Gun Ban?

I see nothing in a major news thread yet, but... could it be? Heads up Illegalnois!

http://howappealing.law.com/
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf

BREAKING NEWS -- Divided three-judge D.C. Circuit panel holds that the District of Columbia's gun control laws violate individuals' Second Amendment rights: You can access today's lengthy D.C. Circuit ruling at this link.

According to the majority opinion, "[T]he phrase 'the right of the people,' when read intratextually and in light of Supreme Court precedent, leads us to conclude that the right in question is individual." The majority opinion sums up its holding on this point as follows:

To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second Amendment's civic purpose, however, the activities it protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia.

The majority opinion also rejects the argument that the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because it is not a State. And the majority opinion concludes, "Section 7-2507.02, like the bar on carrying a pistol within the home, amounts to a complete prohibition on the lawful use of handguns for self-defense. As such, we hold it unconstitutional."

Senior Circuit Judge Laurence H. Silberman wrote the majority opinion, in which Circuit Judge Thomas B. Griffith joined. Circuit Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson dissented.

Judge Henderson's dissenting opinion makes clear that she would conclude that the Second Amendment does not bestow an individual right based on what she considers to be binding U.S. Supreme Court precedent requiring that result. But her other main point is that the majority's assertion to the contrary constitutes nothing more than dicta because the Second Amendment's protections, whatever they entail, do not extend to the District of Columbia, because it is not a State.

This is a fascinating and groundbreaking ruling that would appear to be a likely candidate for U.S. Supreme Court review if not overturned first by the en banc D.C. Circuit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More...
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?page=article&Article_ID=14177
REPEAL D.C.'S GUN LAW

Washington, D.C., has one of the highest homicide rates in the country despite having the strictest gun law in the country. This week, council member Marion Barry and three other lawmakers proposed suspending the city's 30-year-old handgun ban. For 90 days, Washingtonians should be able to buy and register handguns. It is a good start, though a permanent repeal would make more sense, says the Washington Times.

Barry's office admits the bill is "an acknowledgement that people do have guns." He and the other lawmakers think that the solution is to make sure all guns are registered, though the people who will register their guns are not the problem, says the Times:

* Canada, which has registered handguns since the 1930s and all guns since 1998, recently admitted that it could not identify a single violent crime that had been solved because of registration.
* Hawaii, which has had registration and licensing for around 50 years and well-protected borders, has had the same experience.

An amnesty to register guns isn't going to make D.C. safer. The laws fail for a simple reason: Criminals rarely leave their guns at the scene so that they could be tracked, and even when they do, the criminals' guns are not registered. Registration really just imposes a cost on law-abiding citizens.

The city should also do away with other laws that endanger innocent people, such as requirements that we keep our guns locked, unloaded and disassembled. It may take less than eight minutes to unlock and load your gun for defense, but it still takes too long. Research indicates these laws endanger many more lives than they save.

Since 1976, the city's murder rate is up 32 percent. The country's is down 36 percent. Let's see whether letting law-abiding citizens get more guns means less crime, says the Times.

Source: Editorial, "Repeal D.C.'s gun law," Washington Times, February 9, 2007.