VICTORY IN PALMER!!!!

press1280 · Sep 17, 2014

esqappellate said:
Is it possible that anyone is surprised by this? I expect it to be as onerous as possible.

Nope not suprised at all. DC already had this law pre-Heller, and chose not to issue ANY permits for many years. It won't take a rocket scientist to figure out they're just going to do the same thing, maybe they'll issue to a few cronies just for show.
The question is how this plays out. From Scullin's opinion, this won't fly with him. But perhaps DC is hoping to carry its new may issue to the DC Circuit, get a sympathetic court (with our nemesis Judge Henderson) who will then follow Kachalsky, Woollard, and Drake and uphold it.

ericahls · Sep 17, 2014

We decide who carries

I like how they say in the article:

“ The District is seeking to let the police chief decide whether people have a reason to carry a concealed firearm, and officials said living in a high-crime neighborhood would not be a sufficient reason to obtain a permit. People who've received death threats or have been the victims of domestic violence are among those who could be granted permits. “

---So the message is IF you survive your attack we MAY issue you a permit to defend yourself. :mad54:

"I happen to be one that really does not support having people walking around with guns, concealed or otherwise," Mayor Vincent Gray said.” -- He should have said SUBJECTS not people.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/dc-leaders-propose-concealed-handgun-permits-25575672

DC-W · Sep 17, 2014

ericahls said:
I like how they say in the article:

“ The District is seeking to let the police chief decide whether people have a reason to carry a concealed firearm, and officials said living in a high-crime neighborhood would not be a sufficient reason to obtain a permit. People who've received death threats or have been the victims of domestic violence are among those who could be granted permits. “

---So the message is IF you survive your attack we MAY issue you a permit to defend yourself.

"I happen to be one that really does not support having people walking around with guns, concealed or otherwise," Mayor Vincent Gray said.” -- He should have said SUBJECTS not people.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/dc-leaders-propose-concealed-handgun-permits-25575672

It's been said in testimony here plenty of times...

As for Gray, what a damn hypocrite. He's surrounded by firearms held by "people"

ryan_j · Sep 17, 2014

esqappellate said:
Is it possible that anyone is surprised by this? I expect it to be as onerous as possible.

I wonder if judge Scullin will accept may-issue to satisfy the ruling?

ryan_j · Sep 17, 2014

Peaceful John said:
But, as observed by others, there are precedents. Driver's licenses, marriage certificates, etc. are not enumerated rights, while "keep and bear" is.

Is there a federal law to recognize driver licenses to drive? I thought that we had individual state laws, and some states do not recognize all driver licenses, such as learner permits.

Marriage licenses are valid only in the state they are issued in, and in most cases the city/town/county, this is because the marriage license is just a license to get married. In some cases it may serve as a record of the marriage itself. The marriage itself is recognized in all 50 states I believe due to state laws (probably dating back to common law) and internationally due to the Hague convention on marriages. I do not believe there is a federal marriage reciprocity law... in fact there are many states that do not recognize some marriages (same sex marriages). Despite DOMA being struck down, it only affected federal benefits.

danb · Sep 17, 2014

If they pass emergency legislation, doesn't that moot any appeal?

Inigoes · Sep 17, 2014

danb said:
If they pass emergency legislation, doesn't that moot any appeal?

Nope

They have to give the guy from MDna carry license.

danb · Sep 17, 2014

Inigoes said:
Nope

They have to give the guy from MDna carry license.

Do they? Or just a "mechansism" to get a permit - ie get a MD or VA permit and recognize it? It sucks, but MD law is not really the issue in this case.

amoebicmagician · Sep 17, 2014

why we gotta bite each others dicks when there are liberals who deserve it more?

krucam · Sep 18, 2014

Judge Scullin issued an order today regarding the expanded (180 day) Stay Request - NO, but maybe a little more than 90 could be considered. But you gotta show me you're making progress you're making towards the District decision :thumbsup:

Regarding the Motion for Reconsideration...let's talk about this on October 17th. Hoping he already knows his feelings on this, but is just being "polite".

09/17/2014 66 ORDER: The Court hereby ORDERS that Defendants' # 52 MOTION to Stay is DENIED; however, the Court will entertain a motion to extend the stay beyond October 22, 2014. If Defendants wish to make such a motion, they must file papers in support of that motion on or before 10/3/0214, setting forth in detail what, if any, progress they have made to comply with the Court's decision. Plaintiffs may file any opposition that they have to Defendants' motion on or before 10/10/2014. If Defendants file such a motion, the Court will hear oral argument in support of, and in opposition to, said motion on 10/17/2014 at 10:30 AM. The Court further ORDERS that the Court will hear oral argument in support of, and in opposition to, Defendants' # 63 MOTION for Reconsideration on 10/17/2014 at 10:30 AM. Signed by Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. on 9/17/2014. (Scullin, Frederick) (Entered: 09/17/2014)

Maestro Pistolero · Sep 18, 2014

DC is now essentially under court supervision in this matter until and unless this judge is satisfied that whatever new regulations are adopted are constitutional. I love this. Based on DC's announcement today of new shall-issue legislation I expect that the next two words out of this judge's mouth are likely to be "try again".

ih23 · Sep 18, 2014

I haven't been up to date much on this. So if you can correct me, please do. As I understand, if the Judge ends up denying the motion to extend the current stay, does that mean DC must allow residents with registered guns to carry without a license, that is, until they make a law agreeable to the judge? And how long will the judge tolerate DC going back and forth trying to make a law agreeable to his order? And how does the appeal process come into play now? Just curious here.

press1280 · Sep 18, 2014

ih23 said:
I haven't been up to date much on this. So if you can correct me, please do. As I understand, if the Judge ends up denying the motion to extend the current stay, does that mean DC must allow residents with registered guns to carry without a license, that is, until they make a law agreeable to the judge? And how long will the judge tolerate DC going back and forth trying to make a law agreeable to his order? And how does the appeal process come into play now? Just curious here.

My thoughts exactly. So what happens when/if DC's window on appeal closes, they then adopt this may-issue scheme. Are they then locked in to satisfying Judge Scullin, or can they appeal to the DC Circuit with this new law?

krucam · Sep 18, 2014

ih23 said:
I haven't been up to date much on this. So if you can correct me, please do. As I understand, if the Judge ends up denying the motion to extend the current stay, does that mean DC must allow residents with registered guns to carry without a license, that is, until they make a law agreeable to the judge? And how long will the judge tolerate DC going back and forth trying to make a law agreeable to his order? And how does the appeal process come into play now? Just curious here.

The current 90 day stay expires ~ Oct 22nd. By then, they must have developed legislation that falls in line with the ruling, or have an appeal in place AND then request a Stay from the Court of Appeals.

The deadline to appeal is 30 days from the day the Motion for Reconsideration is resolved. There is a Oct 17 Oral Arg to resolve this. Expect a ruling in fairly short order. 30 days following would be mid/late November, which is well past the District allowed 90 day Stay expiration of Oct 22.

Wednesday's Order implied he might allow some expansion of his Stay, just not 180 days total. Perhaps to align with the later Appeal deadline in November??

Next week, DC City Council is to unveil their new legislation. IF it doesn't fall into a Shall-Issue style, and indications are it won't, expect a quick response from SAF. More drama, leading into the October Oral Argument.

Dogabutila · Sep 18, 2014

It looks like they want to do some maryland // NJ "reasonable cause" or some crap.

Afrikeber · Sep 18, 2014

Scullin is not having any of this nonesense as I see it. I'm praying all the stars align making this final decision into "shall issue" for all.....but then when is it really final?

Inigoes · Sep 18, 2014

danb said:
Do they? Or just a "mechansism" to get a permit - ie get a MD or VA permit and recognize it? It sucks, but MD law is not really the issue in this case.

Yep

A plaintiff is from MD. Its in the initial order DC has to let him defend himself.

Jerzee Transplant · Sep 18, 2014

Was Hon. Scullin (who I believe is retired from NY area) hand picked by Justice Roberts to fill in for DC? Or was it a remarkable luck of the draw?

GTOGUNNER · Sep 18, 2014

So with a suit on, I will be able to watch Alan Gura in action on October 17th. Sweet!

IJM · Sep 18, 2014

Subscribed. Let's hope DC's may-issue approach gets smacked down in court.

VICTORY IN PALMER!!!!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

Head'n for the hills

dont be a dumbass

Samopal Goblin

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Active Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Head'n for the hills

Member

IANAL, PATRIOT PICKET!!

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics