In Unanimous Vote, Washington DC Passes Bill to End Its Handgun Ban

[XDTalk RSS]

With the unanimous support of his 12 D.C. Council colleagues, Phil Mendelson introduced a bill that would end the city's handgun ban and make it legal for residents to keep firearms in their homes without requirements that trigger locks be used or that they be disassembled. The bill is in response to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision last week to strike down the ban as unconstitutional and... [Washington Post, via gunpolicy.org ]

More...

[TexicanKid]

Once D.C. folk have a taste of freedom, they will want more. Who knows, someday they might feel and act like real Americans.

But we need to go easy with them; they have been oppressed for a long time, sort of like the Iraqi's. It all ain't going to happen overnight.

[jtkratzer]

If it's unconstitutional, then the city doesn't have a choice. I'm not seeing anything special here.

[jtkratzer]

I'm seeing the same crap being forced on the people of DC because this ruling went against what the politicians want:

Yesterday's votes came at the end of a 10-hour legislative meeting that began with the introduction of a gun bill meant to put the city in compliance with last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down the District's strict handgun law as unconstitutional.



With the unanimous support of his 12 colleagues, Phil Mendelson introduced a bill that would end the city's handgun ban and make it legal for residents to keep firearms in their homes without requirements that trigger locks be used or that they be disassembled.



Mendelson's bill would still require that guns be kept unloaded and disabled, but it would offer an exception for gun owners who say the firearm is present in the home for immediate self-defense.

Where does the ruling say the guns are required to be unloaded?


What does disabled mean? What is a disabled gun? Wasn't the point of the Supreme Court ruling to strike down the fact that an unassembled gun or a gun with a trigger lock on it at all times is useless for self-defense? Isn't an unloaded gun useless? Isn't a disabled gun useless? How do you disable a gun? WTF is wrong with this guy? Has he ever held a firearm in his life?

"The language is taken verbatim from the last page of the Supreme Court ruling," Mendelson said. "The Supreme Court ruling was regrettable, but nevertheless, it is the law of the land."

You're regrettable you miserable piece of sh*t. The ruling was in favor of freedom, liberty, and all that this country stands for and was based on the constitution, not your snot nosed whining.


Was it right from the ruling? Just like semi-auto handguns remain generally illegal according the chief of police?


These people are complete douche bags.

Mendelson (D-At Large) said he will depend on the testimony of witnesses at a round-table discussion today to decide whether emergency legislation should be introduced before the body recesses July 15. Otherwise, he said, the council will vote on the issue in the fall.

There shouldn't have to be a bill in the first place. The Supreme Court ruled, that's the law of the land, not your opinion of the ruling. It should take effect immediately, not when it's convenient for you asshats to drag your feet around until you feel like restoring freedom.

[XDConvert9mm]

Why has the council even decided to vote on this when it has been ruled on by SCOTUS? It's amazing to me that they would have to vote to affirm an already done deal by the highest court in the land.

[eric_t12]

Originally Posted by jtkratzer

If it's unconstitutional, then the city doesn't have a choice. I'm not seeing anything special here.

i agree.


this is a political feel-good move, vote gathering or whatever...


in a few weeks we'll see a 10-2 vote enacting laws that make it a defacto ban... 1 year waits for 'permits,' $500 'training courses,' and 5-shot magazine limits.

[rpsmith]

Originally Posted by TexicanKid

Once D.C. folk have a taste of freedom, they will want more. Who knows, someday they might feel and act like real Americans.

But we need to go easy with them; they have been oppressed for a long time, sort of like the Iraqi's. It all ain't going to happen overnight.

Why not? the dems seem to think that Iraq should be perfect overnite