Just what does that mean? I have 4 carry permits - CT, FL, UT, ME. I live in NJ. Can I carry or am I SOL?
VICTORY IN PALMER!!!!
- Thread starter teratos
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Just what does that mean? I have 4 carry permits - CT, FL, UT, ME. I live in NJ. Can I carry or am I SOL?
If you are legal to possess a firearm as a nonresident. You can have a firearm amd ammo in DC.
I'm not trying to argue but that is NOT what Miller is reporting tonight. She said Lanier stated you have to have a carry permit from state of residence or live where no permit is required. I understand that this wasn't in the advisory we saw earlier but it doesn't mean Miller is wrong or that Lanier isn't still crafting how to handle this.
Miller is putting out info that could keep folks out of pretty hefty legal bills. I wouldn't write it off so quickly.
She was reporting info she was getting from Lanier and dc police not making assumptions from the advisory. I would give her reports a little more credit until we know more.
Correct, sometimes we are our own worst enemies. Emily has been off, she should have reviewed the technical info rather than parroting Lanier.
That's what I thought, but everyone has been saying different things.
That's not what she reported either. She said:
"DC police chief- Non residents can possess a gun if legal to carry in home state or have valid carry permit."
She did not say which state the permit had to be from.
The ruling actually says:
"Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District"
Lanier can't just make up a regulation. The DC city council or Congress has to do so.
I love Emily Miller but she is wrong IMO. The directive from DC Police says nothing about carry permits, EXCEPT in the examples she provided for her officers. As long as you are not prohibited from owning a firearm in your home state, you may carry in DC (For now, anyway) Lanier is either playing games and issuing different orders (than the directive) to her officers, or isn't smart enough to understand it. IF Lanier is now saying a permit in your home state is required, she is in direct conflict with the court's ruling. That doesn't necessarily mean they won't try something though.
geez. If she was relaying what Lanier told her than Miller isn't "wrong." LANIER is wrong and it isn't something that can possibly be enforced but it doesn't mean that Emily's report that Lanier said it is wrong. that was and is my only point. It's a technicality. miller isn't wrong, she's just relaying what Lanier said (which is wrong lol). I shouldn't have brought it up.
You are correct. My apologies, I didn't mean to jump on you. I guess I should have clarified that perhaps Emily Miller should either point out the conflict or not be so quick to release information that is contradictory.
safecracker
Unrepentant Sinner
- Feb 26, 2009
- 2,405
Get past the pretty face. Emily Miller is a f**king dimwit.
danb
dont be a dumbass
Chalk it up to fog of war people.
I dont think its fair to blame Miller, Lanier, or anyone else. Nobody had thought this would happen, and DC has no experience with freedom.
So how many gallons of blood ran today, btw. Oh yeah, none.
I dont think its fair to blame Miller, Lanier, or anyone else. Nobody had thought this would happen, and DC has no experience with freedom.
So how many gallons of blood ran today, btw. Oh yeah, none.
I stand by my statement that a 90 stay is a good thing, and the fact that Alan Gura so readily agreed to DC's request reinforces that view in my opinion.
DC has been down this road before, and lost in Heller. They can lose again, and they know that. They may be biased ideologues, but they're not stupid.
Right now they're facing a federal court order that to keep, and now to bear arms, is unconstitutional. That same order has language that seems to preclude May Issue, since self defense was cited as a reason to bear (hence they can't use a Maryland G&S structure). Unless they act legislatively they may be looking at Constitutional Carry for handguns - open or concealed. For one day, on Monday, that's exactly what they had in the city. The horror...
They might not want to roll that dice, having been down that road before, and lost. Instead, they may want to be captains of their own destiny. If they pass a Shall Issue permit system at least they can, within limits, specify the time, manner, and place. They can try to put in big training requirements, costly fees, fingerprinting, background checks, photo IDs, all of the silly hoops they put in place for home ownership, and more. They can deny reciprocity. They can do all of that, and more.
Gura could easily be giving them leash to do that, knowing that in the end: a) he can litigate if the restrictions are too onerous, and b) the bottom line will be a Shall Issue permit system will be in place. That's a win in anyone's book, vs. the absolute carry prohibition that now exists.
That's the dilemma that now faces the DC City Council. Roll the dice, lose it all, and face Constitutional Carry, or try to make lemonade out of lemons. They only have 90 days to get their house in order.
Yes, they can stall, do nothing, and appeal. But if you look at it from their side, that's a risky strategy that the SAF has boxed them into facing. They may well choose the lesser of two evils (from their perspective) and pass carry legislation that at least they can control.
If I'm wrong (and assuming this is what Gura is thinking (admittedly speculation on my part)) well no big loss other than a 90 day delay. Given how long DC has been denying Constitutional rights to its citizens, and how slowly the wheels of justice turn in the best of circumstances, a 90 day gamble is of little consequence. And Gura said he'd oppose anything longer.
DC has been down this road before, and lost in Heller. They can lose again, and they know that. They may be biased ideologues, but they're not stupid.
Right now they're facing a federal court order that to keep, and now to bear arms, is unconstitutional. That same order has language that seems to preclude May Issue, since self defense was cited as a reason to bear (hence they can't use a Maryland G&S structure). Unless they act legislatively they may be looking at Constitutional Carry for handguns - open or concealed. For one day, on Monday, that's exactly what they had in the city. The horror...
They might not want to roll that dice, having been down that road before, and lost. Instead, they may want to be captains of their own destiny. If they pass a Shall Issue permit system at least they can, within limits, specify the time, manner, and place. They can try to put in big training requirements, costly fees, fingerprinting, background checks, photo IDs, all of the silly hoops they put in place for home ownership, and more. They can deny reciprocity. They can do all of that, and more.
Gura could easily be giving them leash to do that, knowing that in the end: a) he can litigate if the restrictions are too onerous, and b) the bottom line will be a Shall Issue permit system will be in place. That's a win in anyone's book, vs. the absolute carry prohibition that now exists.
That's the dilemma that now faces the DC City Council. Roll the dice, lose it all, and face Constitutional Carry, or try to make lemonade out of lemons. They only have 90 days to get their house in order.
Yes, they can stall, do nothing, and appeal. But if you look at it from their side, that's a risky strategy that the SAF has boxed them into facing. They may well choose the lesser of two evils (from their perspective) and pass carry legislation that at least they can control.
If I'm wrong (and assuming this is what Gura is thinking (admittedly speculation on my part)) well no big loss other than a 90 day delay. Given how long DC has been denying Constitutional rights to its citizens, and how slowly the wheels of justice turn in the best of circumstances, a 90 day gamble is of little consequence. And Gura said he'd oppose anything longer.
AliasNeo07
Ultimate Member
It will be.
And, this will drag on for years and then be overturned.
It's not battered gun owner syndrome, just the way things usually go...
Yeah...or it gets to SCOTUS and we lose. Then we're screwed for life I guess.
But hey I guess I shouldn't be such a downer. A win is better than a loss.
Good news.
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
Suggestions for a low powered, large objective rifle scope? (2 Viewers)- Started by E.Shell
- Replies: 10
-
-
Timonium Gun Show April 27-28 (Timonium Fairgrounds Exhibition Hall)
- Started by joro55
- Replies: 1
-
-
