D.C. Grants First Concealed Carry Permits, Ending Decades-Long Prohibition

[rickyrick]

Dignitaries are the ones surrounded by those bodyguards that have somehow earned and had their rights bestowed upon them by some other dignitary... Shouldn't be hard to spot... Lol

It is a step

 

[gc70]

So what's the legal definition of a 'dignitary'?

There is no legal definition other than whoever they say, as long as the person is under police protection.

I don't see how that 1000' rule can possibly be constitutional, it's simply not possible to know where these "foreign dignitaries" are at any time.

Here is the official explanation from D.C. Act 20-621 (February 6, 2015):

(13)(A) When a dignitary or high-ranking official of the United States or a state, local, or foreign government is moving under the protection of the MPD, the U. S. Secret Service, the U.S. Capitol Police, or other law enforcement agency assisting or working in concert with MPD, within an area designated by the Chief, the Chief of the U.S. Secret Service, or the Chief of the U.S. Capitol Police, or a designee of any of the foregoing, that does not include any point at a distance greater than 1,000 feet from the moving dignitary or high-ranking official; provided, that no licensee shall be criminally prosecuted unless:
(i) The law enforcement agency provides notice of the designated area by the presence of signs, law enforcement vehicles or officers acting as a perimeter, or other means to make the designated area of protection obvious;
(ii) The District or federal government has provided notice prohibiting the carrying of pistols along a designated route or in a designated area in advance of the event, if possible, and by posted signage along a route or in a designated area; or
(iii) The licensee has been ordered by a law enforcement officer to leave the designated area and the licensee has not complied with the order.

 

[TimSr]

I wonder if the police will have the permit holders under a microscope, waiting for them to slip up and violate one of the numerous draconian restrictions, and then make an example of them.

I dubt it since those who actually got permits probably have "senator" or "congresman" in front of their name, and (D) after it.

 

[Colt46]

Mr. Gura isn't done with this yet

It seems they have an arbitrary and capricious system as stands.
We will never have justice If those who conspire to violate the law in this manner aren't punished.

 

[alan]

The French had a word for it,they had a word for several things. Here their "word" was Noblese Oblige, the English translation being Nobility Obliges. Do the "public servants" of Washington D.C. serve the public, or is it the other way round? Judge for yourselves.

 

[Colt46]

The arrogance of these jokers are what gets me the most

They are free to act however they see fit without any kind of consequence.

 

[godot]

Under the restrictive "may-issue" permitting scheme, applicants for concealed carry permits have to meet one of three conditions: Prove that they face a personal threat


It seems to me that living/being in a city that consistently has a violent crime rate 100 to 150 percent higher then the violent crime rate in the rest of the US would seem to prove they face a personal threat.
Not to beat a dead horse, but residents also face a higher rate of rape, robbery, arson, you name it. Charles Schumer as of a few years ago had been mugged 3 times. If a US congressman isn't safe, how secure are ordinary unarmed residents?

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Under the restrictive "may-issue" permitting scheme, applicants for concealed carry permits have to meet one of three conditions: Prove that they face a personal threat


It seems to me that living/being in a city that consistently has a violent crime rate 100 to 150 percent higher then the violent crime rate in the rest of the US would seem to prove they face a personal threat.
Not to beat a dead horse, but residents also face a higher rate of rape, robbery, arson, you name it. Charles Schumer as of a few years ago had been mugged 3 times. If a US congressman isn't safe, how secure are ordinary unarmed residents?

There ya go again, thinking like a logical person.

They way the pinheads behind the permitting scheme look at it, general crime statistics only show a "general" threat. A personal threat would only be if some party or parties had made specific threats directly against you.

 

[Tom Servo]

It seems to me that living/being in a city that consistently has a violent crime rate 100 to 150 percent higher then the violent crime rate in the rest of the US would seem to prove they face a personal threat.

You know, I've never actually seen it argued quite that way. It's a compelling way to put it.

 

[Armed_Chicagoan]

Good news!

Judge Scullin grants plaintiff's request for an injunction barring DC from enforcing it's "good cause" requirement: http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=17244

IV. CONCLUSION
After reviewing the entire file in this matter, the parties' submissions and the applicable law,
and for the above-stated reasons, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED; and the Court
further
ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in
active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the injunction are enjoined
from enforcing the requirement of D.C. Code § 22-4506(a) that handgun carry license applicants
have a "good reason to fear injury to his or her person or property or has any other proper reason for
carrying a pistol," including, but not limited to, the manner in which that requirement is defined by D.C. Code § 7-2509.11 and 24 D.C.M.R. §§ 2333.1, 2333.2, 2333.3, 2333.4, and 2334.1, against
Plaintiffs Brian Wrenn, Joshua Akery, Tyler Whidby, and other members of Plaintiff Second
Amendment Foundation, Inc.; and the Court further

Case 1:15-cv-00162-FJS Document 13 Filed 05/18/15 Page 22 of 23
ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the injunction, are enjoined
from denying handgun carry licenses to applicants who meet the requirements of D.C. Code 22-
4506(a) and all other current requirements for the possession and carrying of handguns under
District of Columbia law; and the Court further
ORDERS that, pursuant to Rule 65(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs
shall post security in the amount of $1,000.00; and the Court further
ORDERS that counsel shall appear for a conference with the Court on Tuesday, July 7,
2015, at 11:00 a.m. to discuss an expedited schedule for the resolution of this case.

 

[Luger_carbine]

Judge Benson Legg wrote a very strong opinion showing that "good and substantial reason" was unconstitutional, but the 4CCA overturned it.

I guess if this proceeds it would go the way of Heller though... going back to the the Heller D.C Cir. seems like it might be a losing strategy for Defendants - District of Columbia.

 

[motorhead0922]

Judge Scullin grants plaintiff's request for an injunction barring DC from enforcing it's "good cause" requirement

And DC Police Chief Cathy Lanier will abide by the ruling:

D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier, who has final decision-making authority on issuing the permits, said she won't deny anyone for failing to show a reason. She also said she doesn't think the preliminary injunction will prompt a spike in applications. About 100 people have applied for permits, and very few have been denied, she said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...g-part-good-reason-gun-law/?intcmp=latestnews

 

[Armed_Chicagoan]

Judge Scullin issued another smackdown to DC this morning:

The federal district court judge handling the Second Amendment Foundation’s challenge to the District of Columbia’s “good reason” concealed carry permit requirement has denied the city’s request for an immediate administrative stay of his ruling last week granting a preliminary injunction against further enforcement of the requirement. The District is also seeking a stay pending appeal.

Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr., announced his decision this morning, and set two important dates. By June 22, SAF and its co-plaintiffs must file papers opposing the city’s stay pending appeal request, and the city must respond by June 26. This development is seen as a clear win by SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb.

Baby steps, hopefully leading to a SCOTUS opinion stating in clear terms that the right to keep and bear arms is not subject to arbitrary government regulation restricting it.