The precedent is not binding but I bet they think that since SCOTUS denied cert for Woollard, Drake and Kachalsky that may-issue is safe from being struck down by SCOTUS.
But the Circuit upheld Heller didn't it?
The precedent is not binding but I bet they think that since SCOTUS denied cert for Woollard, Drake and Kachalsky that may-issue is safe from being struck down by SCOTUS.
The precedent is not binding but I bet they think that since SCOTUS denied cert for Woollard, Drake and Kachalsky that may-issue is safe from being struck down by SCOTUS.
Hence why I said delay the decision for a year and train the cops.
I think the idea of delaying for another year is absurd. A right delayed is a right denied. It has been delayed long enough.
Are you aware of instances of harassment by MPD officers of lawful gun carriers in the few days that it was legal? If MPD officers were able to behave properly during those few days why would an additional year of delay be required? Even the Chief said MPD officers deal with lawfully armed individuals on a daily basis. DC likely has more per capita law enforcement than any place on earth. You guys aren't shooting each other in plain clothes every day. Why should the law abiding citizen have his rights stomped on any further? This has been addressed since the beginning of our country in the Constitution. If upholding that sacred document is part of the oath sworn to by MPD officers it would seem to me that there shouldn't be issues. Just as there were no issues reported that I am aware of in the few days of lawful carry recently. If some MPD officers can't adapt to finally being able to see the Constitution honored perhaps they should seek another line of work. Of course I am not lumping you in with that statement as I am aware you are a strong 2A supporter.
Wrong....we don't deal with lawfully armed people everyday unless we pull over another cop.
Wrong....we don't deal with lawfully armed people everyday unless we pull over another cop.
Right....a right delayed is dented.....however for a CCWer a cop can be a best friend or a worst enemy.....I'd prefer the roll out to be one that is so positive its roll model worthy for states to say, ". Wow that violent hell hole had zero issues with carry!"
As far as the interaction between MPD and carriers I can't tell you how it went.....I work in SE
But the Circuit upheld Heller didn't it?
SE, yeah likely no lawful carriers there. 7-D? I get your preferences and I'd prefer that liberals had no 1-A and voting rights but our preferences shouldn't negate the Constitution.
Anyway lots of lawful carry happens successfully without issues in large and violent cities as noted below. Now that many of the 86-89 crowd is or will soon be retiring MPD has a large stable of intelligent, educated, and highly qualified LEO's. There should be no reason for there to be major issues when more violent places like Detroit, St. Louis, Birmingham, and Cleveland can deal with every day successfully.
2012 FBI stats 10 most violent US cities (DC is not on the list):
1. FLINT, MICH. shall issue
2. DETROIT, MICH. shall issue
3. OAKLAND, CALIF. (may become shall issue)
4. ST. LOUIS, MO. shall issue
5. MEMPHIS, TENN. shall issue
6. STOCKTON, CALIF. (may become shall issue)
7. BIRMINGHAM, ALA. shall issue
8. NEW HAVEN, CONN. shall issue
9. BALTIMORE, MD. (may never become shall issue )
10. CLEVELAND, OHIO shall issue
Wrong....we don't deal with lawfully armed people everyday unless we pull over another cop.
Right....a right delayed is dented.....however for a CCWer a cop can be a best friend or a worst enemy.....I'd prefer the roll out to be one that is so positive its roll model worthy for states to say, ". Wow that violent hell hole had zero issues with carry!"
As far as the interaction between MPD and carriers I can't tell you how it went.....I work in SE
Of course. But remember Heller has that "the right is not unlimited" stuff, which has been used as a catch all by anti judges to uphold restrictive may-issue.
It's annoying that that specific line is used by the other side to completely disregard Heller. If they're going to throw something like that into the opinion they should spend the rest of the opinion discussing what they mean by it.
They didn't exactly help by saying that historically restrictions on concealed weapons have been upheld.
That part may have been part of any "Kennedy compromise" which is highly rumored.
I think they will wait to see if Peruta goes en banc before deciding next steps. Part of the Palmer opinion relied on Peruta. It's premature to guess what they might attempt.
They cannot change the law without mooting the case. If Peruta (Baker, et al) goes to the 9th en banc panel they will appeal, that's my guess.
We should know the fate of Peruta in two weeks.
You forgot the alternative, Peruta gets no intervener status, Harris gets told to take a hike, CA9 rejects her appeal of en banc, and they summarily deny Baker as well.
Who then plays the game of cert chicken? HI? or DC?
Notice, I don't give any of this odds, because I still think Harris gets her status.
6-D vice and I totally agree with your assessment and I can't say your wrong.....except its the 89-91 crowd ........I just want to see this work on all sides. I don't want anything the media can spin in a negative manner. As I said previously, I want this roll out to be the poster child for CCW.......my actual guess, they will adopt MD laws.
Was it in the ruling or dicta? I can't remember.
You forgot the alternative, Peruta gets no intervener status, Harris gets told to take a hike, CA9 rejects her appeal of en banc, and they summarily deny Baker as well.
Who then plays the game of cert chicken? HI? or DC?
Notice, I don't give any of this odds, because I still think Harris gets her status.