Second Amendment Enforcement Act

District Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) assailed the measure in a release of her own today. She vowed to fight the measure: "They underestimate our residents if they think this city will tolerate autocratic rule from Congress any more than the Jordan and Ross districts would tolerate dictatorship from Congress on local matters," Norton said.

Click to expand...

1. Permits the carrying of guns in public, openly or concealed.
2. Repeals D.C.'s ban on large capacity ammunition feeding devices (i.e., magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds).
3. Repeals D.C.'s ban on assault weapons, including .50 caliber rifles.
4. Prohibits residential and commercial property owners from banning tenants from having guns on their property.
5. Bars D.C. from prohibiting guns in District owned or controlled buildings and structures that do not have certain security measures in place, which could include elementary schools and recreation centers, and D.C. cannot prevent private tenants of city owned or controlled buildings and structures from bringing guns into them, regardless of the security measures in place.
6. Repeals D.C.'s categories of prohibited possessors; for example, a person who was voluntarily committed to a mental institution could buy a gun.
7. Prevents D.C. from making changes to its gun laws in the future.
8. Creates the only exception to federal law by permitting D.C. residents to make handgun purchases in person outside their place of residency, in this case, in Maryland and Virginia.
9. Repeals D.C.'s gun registration requirements.
10. Repeals D.C.'s limitation on the number of handguns that can be purchased per month.
11. Repeals D.C.'s 10-day waiting period to buy handguns or rifles. There would only be a 48-hour waiting period for handguns.
12. Repeals D.C.'s gun training requirements.
13. May permit sales in D.C. between individuals without federal background checks.
14. Repeals D.C.'s design safety standards for handguns.
15. Repeals D.C.'s requirement of microstamping for semiautomatic handguns.
16. Repeals D.C.'s requirement of ballistics testing for handguns.
17. Reduces penalties if a child is injured by a negligently stored gun.

krucam said:

I don't think this bill has a prayer of passing, but it IS fun watching Eleanor Holmes Norton squirm!

Click to expand...

District Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) assailed the measure in a release of her own today. She vowed to fight the measure: "They underestimate our residents if they think this city will tolerate autocratic rule from Congress any more than the Jordan and Ross districts would tolerate dictatorship from Congress on local matters," Norton said.

Click to expand...

jdramsey said:

Why can't they apply this nationally? Or would it? If this passed, DC would then have better gun laws than Maryland.

Click to expand...

Washington, D.C., is governed by a mayor and a 13-member city council. However, the United States Congress has supreme authority over the city and may overturn local laws.

Click to expand...

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Click to expand...

GNLaFrance said:

It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
~ William Shakespeare > Macbeth > Act V, Sc. v

Click to expand...

1. Repeals D.C.'s ban on large capacity ammunition feeding devices (i.e., magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds).
2. Repeals D.C.'s ban on assault weapons, including .50 caliber rifles.
3. Prohibits residential and commercial property owners from banning tenants from having guns on their property.
4. Bars D.C. from prohibiting guns in District owned or controlled buildings and structures that do not have certain security measures in place, which could include elementary schools and recreation centers, and D.C. cannot prevent private tenants of city owned or controlled buildings and structures from bringing guns into them, regardless of the security measures in place.
5. Repeals D.C.'s categories of prohibited possessors; for example, a person who was voluntarily committed to a mental institution could buy a gun.
6. Prevents D.C. from making changes to its gun laws in the future.
7. Creates the only exception to federal law by permitting D.C. residents to make handgun purchases in person outside their place of residency, in this case, in Maryland and Virginia.
8. Repeals D.C.'s design safety standards for handguns.
9. Repeals D.C.'s requirement of microstamping for semiautomatic handguns.
10. Repeals D.C.'s requirement of ballistics testing for handguns.
11. Reduces penalties if a child is injured by a negligently stored gun.

jonnyl said:

They should have started a little slower, would have a much better chance of passing and vastly improve their current situation.

1. Repeals D.C.'s ban on large capacity ammunition feeding devices (i.e., magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds).
2. Repeals D.C.'s ban on assault weapons, including .50 caliber rifles.
3. Prohibits residential and commercial property owners from banning tenants from having guns on their property.
4. Bars D.C. from prohibiting guns in District owned or controlled buildings and structures that do not have certain security measures in place, which could include elementary schools and recreation centers, and D.C. cannot prevent private tenants of city owned or controlled buildings and structures from bringing guns into them, regardless of the security measures in place.
5. Repeals D.C.'s categories of prohibited possessors; for example, a person who was voluntarily committed to a mental institution could buy a gun.
6. Prevents D.C. from making changes to its gun laws in the future.
7. Creates the only exception to federal law by permitting D.C. residents to make handgun purchases in person outside their place of residency, in this case, in Maryland and Virginia.
8. Repeals D.C.'s design safety standards for handguns.
9. Repeals D.C.'s requirement of microstamping for semiautomatic handguns.
10. Repeals D.C.'s requirement of ballistics testing for handguns.
11. Reduces penalties if a child is injured by a negligently stored gun.

Click to expand...

BlueHeeler said:

If Heller II wins that takes care of the low cap magazine requirements, assault weapons, and part of the registration.

That list is not quite accurate. It looks like it is from California law. DC does not have design safety standards for handguns or microstamping.

Click to expand...

jonnyl said:

I was just winging it, I took Mark's list from above and took out what seemed to be the biggest EH Norton heartburn items. (I'm sure they all are!).

I'd love the courts to give us something solid, but damn they're slow!

Click to expand...

GNLaFrance said:

It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
~ William Shakespeare > Macbeth > Act V, Sc. v

Click to expand...

Glaug-Eldare said:

I hope I'm not the only one who finds this part objectionable:

"Prohibits residential and commercial property owners from banning tenants from having guns on their property."

I'm all for lawful carry, but if an anti-gun property owner doesn't want guns on the property they own, isn't that their right? I don't see a conflict with the 2nd Amendment for a PRIVATE property owner to deny someone the privilege of entering with a firearm. They own the property, they get to make the rules. Am I missing something?

Click to expand...

jonnyl said:

I think the key issue is "tenants". This isn't saying someone can't stop someone from entering their home or business with a firearm. It's saying that if you're going to rent from me and become the tenant then I can't deny your constitutional rights. I'd agree it could be an issue with small "landlords" where someone may be renting out a room in their house or something.

Click to expand...

Glaug-Eldare said:

I hope I'm not the only one who finds this part objectionable:

"Prohibits residential and commercial property owners from banning tenants from having guns on their property."

I'm all for lawful carry, but if an anti-gun property owner doesn't want guns on the property they own, isn't that their right? I don't see a conflict with the 2nd Amendment for a PRIVATE property owner to deny someone the privilege of entering with a firearm. They own the property, they get to make the rules. Am I missing something?

Click to expand...

jpk1md said:

So, where do you stand on Smoking bans in restaurants and other privately owned property?

Click to expand...