Wrenn PI Granted (DC Shall Issue)

[swinokur]

Mine is from 1971 and it lists the Commendation Medal as you state. But no Marksmanship award, which I have.

Oh well, I have NRA Basic Pistol so I'm OK. I'll probably include a copy oi my DD214 anyway if they actually don't appeal and the process is amended.

 

[Patrick]

Congress?! Here is the legislation that has been filed in the House and Senate. Has it gone *anywhere* Any hearings? Any action at all? Has it been attached to anything important that the Prez can't/won't veto? And if it hasn't why isn't this posturing? Red meat to the base, so to speak?


12015 CONG US S 874, 114th CONGRESS, 1st Session (Mar 26, 2015), Introduced in Senate, PROPOSED ACTION: Amended.

22015 CONG US HR 1701, 114th CONGRESS, 1st Session (Mar 26, 2015), Introduced in House, PROPOSED ACTION: Amended.

Now, I take the point that Congress *could* do something if DC appeals the case. But that possibility does not appear to have deterred DC in the past. True, Congress is now controlled by the GOP (and it did not control the Senate when Palmer was decided), but the GOP need only enact a joint resolution within the next month to negate this legislation and they could bypass the Prez altogether. See DC ST § 1-206.02 (" Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, such act shall take effect upon the expiration of the 30-calendar-day period (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, and any day on which neither House is in session because of an adjournment sine die, a recess of more than 3 days, or an adjournment of more than 3 days) beginning on the day such act is transmitted by the Chairman to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate, or upon the date prescribed by such act, whichever is later, unless during such 30-day period, there has been enacted into law a joint resolution disapproving such act."). See Wrenn Slip op. at 3 ("The permanent legislation was transmitted to Congress on March 6, 2015, and the projected law date is June 16, 2015"). Any joint resolutions filed?

Was waiting for you to chime in on this...and I think we agree. At the same time, DC's strategy cannot ignore the elephant in the room. That makes them different from Maryland.

I agree Congress is unlikely to do anything, especially given their current schedule. I think they are playing a lot of games with the GOP base right now, tossing some red meat bills out there and actually hoping it will fail because of the Dems. Then they can (in their fantasies) 'whip up the base' and take over the world in 2016.

The thing is we know better. Gun forums and blogs are way ahead of the curve. If it's not an amendment on a bigger bill it is just a feint.


I think DC will seek a stay and look to the eventual appeal. But that said, I don't want to forget that DC has special circumstances and they need to be careful to not poke the beast too hard. A lot of people on the right - including gun people - are starting to grumble that the Congress is feckless on some of these issues.

DC would make a good symbolic gesture that sets up a red meat issue in clear terms. Under the right conditions that 'red meat' meaningless legislation can go from zero to hero right quick, especially if attached to an appropriations bill of the right magnitude. Filing an amendment under regular order takes minutes.

DC has more terrain to evaluate than Chicago, and they need to step a bit more carefully. That will advise their approach. It already has. Also, I would not be surprised to see the DC Circuit turn this into another case of Home Rule introspection.

In other words, the additional angles could get interesting.

 

[Soda]

CHAIRMAN MENDELSON’S STATEMENT REGARDING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AFFECTING DISTRICT’S LICENSE TO CARRY LAW

WASHINGTON, DC – Phil Mendelson, Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, issued the following statement regarding the preliminary injunction issued in Wrenn v District of Columbia, enjoining the District from carrying out certain provisions of our license to carry a handgun law.

“In crafting the District’s license to carry law, the Council consciously followed the regulatory model adopted in a number of other jurisdictions that has withstood constitutional challenges,” Mendelson stated. “This longstanding approach to the concealed carrying of a pistol is no different from what Congress wrote in the law over 80 years ago, and has been, essentially, the law of the District before the Civil War.”

Mendelson continued: “As painstakingly detailed by the Council in enacting the law, our statute reflects the heightened national security needs in the District as we are host to countless high-profile targets, government officials, and a large diplomatic corp. These unique public safety needs are not arbitrary, and our regulatory structure for the concealed carry of handguns reflects that.”
“I believe the District should appeal this decision, as our public safety needs are too important to do otherwise.”

The District’s statute is modeled after regulatory structures in place in New York, New Jersey, and Maryland—jurisdictions which have withstood constitutional challenges in federal courts.

 

[swinokur]

wow, knock me over with a feather.

 

[gamer_jim]

“I believe the District should appeal this decision, as our public safety needs are too important to do otherwise.”

Good, let it be the disaster that Heller was for you.

 

[Elliotte]

Was waiting for you to chime in on this...and I think we agree. At the same time, DC's strategy cannot ignore the elephant in the room. That makes them different from Maryland.

I agree Congress is unlikely to do anything, especially given their current schedule. I think they are playing a lot of games with the GOP base right now, tossing some red meat bills out there and actually hoping it will fail because of the Dems. Then they can (in their fantasies) 'whip up the base' and take over the world in 2016.

The thing is we know better. Gun forums and blogs are way ahead of the curve. If it's not an amendment on a bigger bill it is just a feint.


I think DC will seek a stay and look to the eventual appeal. But that said, I don't want to forget that DC has special circumstances and they need to be careful to not poke the beast too hard. A lot of people on the right - including gun people - are starting to grumble that the Congress is feckless on some of these issues.

DC would make a good symbolic gesture that sets up a red meat issue in clear terms. Under the right conditions that 'red meat' meaningless legislation can go from zero to hero right quick, especially if attached to an appropriations bill of the right magnitude. Filing an amendment under regular order takes minutes.

DC has more terrain to evaluate than Chicago, and they need to step a bit more carefully. That will advise their approach. It already has. Also, I would not be surprised to see the DC Circuit turn this into another case of Home Rule introspection.

In other words, the additional angles could get interesting.

The current GOP leadership will never attach pro-2A stuff to any "must pass" legislation. For one, they're not actually pro-2A themselves so this is just something they can use to stir up the base. And when you've got something that you can use to stir up the base, let it fail, and then blame it failing on the other side, why would you ever find a way to make it pass? You'd be giving up a very effective tool for no gain (since they aren't pro-2A).

 

[Southwest Chuck]

You are correct, of course. I was thinking of Woollard, which still pisses me off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woollard_v._Gallagher

Me too my friend. I was speechless, (which was probably a good thing for the people around me) when I found out that they had denied cert.

 

[esqappellate]

Was waiting for you to chime in on this...and I think we agree. At the same time, DC's strategy cannot ignore the elephant in the room. That makes them different from Maryland.

I agree Congress is unlikely to do anything, especially given their current schedule. I think they are playing a lot of games with the GOP base right now, tossing some red meat bills out there and actually hoping it will fail because of the Dems. Then they can (in their fantasies) 'whip up the base' and take over the world in 2016.

The thing is we know better. Gun forums and blogs are way ahead of the curve. If it's not an amendment on a bigger bill it is just a feint.


I think DC will seek a stay and look to the eventual appeal. But that said, I don't want to forget that DC has special circumstances and they need to be careful to not poke the beast too hard. A lot of people on the right - including gun people - are starting to grumble that the Congress is feckless on some of these issues.

DC would make a good symbolic gesture that sets up a red meat issue in clear terms. Under the right conditions that 'red meat' meaningless legislation can go from zero to hero right quick, especially if attached to an appropriations bill of the right magnitude. Filing an amendment under regular order takes minutes.

DC has more terrain to evaluate than Chicago, and they need to step a bit more carefully. That will advise their approach. It already has. Also, I would not be surprised to see the DC Circuit turn this into another case of Home Rule introspection.

In other words, the additional angles could get interesting.

All true and particularly agree that the gun folks are not naive innocents when it comes to power politics. Still, the GOP doesn't seem to get that when it comes to real action -- or it believes that it doesn't matter as long as they say the right things. It *could* get interesting, but I am not betting the rent money on Congress. Or my Starbucks coffee money for that matter.

 

[Brooklyn]

The current GOP leadership will never attach pro-2A stuff to any "must pass" legislation. For one, they're not actually pro-2A themselves so this is just something they can use to stir up the base. And when you've got something that you can use to stir up the base, let it fail, and then blame it failing on the other side, why would you ever find a way to make it pass? You'd be giving up a very effective tool for no gain (since they aren't pro-2A).

First we are to smart for that.

Second its not up to the leadership.. entirely.. leadership will learn that the back benchers will own the party very soon if they keep this up..

Third the D in congress know its an empty threat ...until it isn't... that's the kind of last minute deal breaker you like to keep under wraps..

Patrick says 2 years... i think that's on the low side... but I defer to his insight...

In any case... it is not going to be 2 weeks...

 

[Peaceful John]

The current GOP leadership will never attach pro-2A stuff to any "must pass" legislation. For one, they're not actually pro-2A themselves so this is just something they can use to stir up the base. And when you've got something that you can use to stir up the base, let it fail, and then blame it failing on the other side, why would you ever find a way to make it pass? You'd be giving up a very effective tool for no gain (since they aren't pro-2A).

It's all about getting re-elected, and stirring the base generates votes. Passing pro-2A stuff may get press for a day or two, but not too many votes. Who votes to say "thank you"? Don't most folks vote to say "I want"? That's why our hope lies with the judiciary. The reason to vote Republican is because we're more likely to get the right judges with that petri dish than with the other petri dish.

 

[Kharn]

Me too my friend. I was speechless, (which was probably a good thing for the people around me) when I found out that they had denied cert.

No split at the time and Woollard's attacker committed suicide a few weeks prior to the cert conference, IIRC...

 

[Brooklyn]

No split at the time and Woollard's attacker committed suicide a few weeks prior to the cert conference, IIRC...

Ripeness... or lack thereof.

The court wants lots or prior litigation to work with..of that I am sure...

 

[Schipperke]

CHAIRMAN MENDELSON’S STATEMENT REGARDING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AFFECTING DISTRICT’S LICENSE TO CARRY LAW

WASHINGTON, DC – Phil Mendelson, Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, issued the following statement regarding the preliminary injunction issued in Wrenn v District of Columbia, enjoining the District from carrying out certain provisions of our license to carry a handgun law.

“In crafting the District’s license to carry law, the Council consciously followed the regulatory model adopted in a number of other jurisdictions that has withstood constitutional challenges,” Mendelson stated. “This longstanding approach to the concealed carrying of a pistol is no different from what Congress wrote in the law over 80 years ago, and has been, essentially, the law of the District before the Civil War.”

Mendelson continued: “As painstakingly detailed by the Council in enacting the law, our statute reflects the heightened national security needs in the District as we are host to countless high-profile targets, government officials, and a large diplomatic corp. These unique public safety needs are not arbitrary, and our regulatory structure for the concealed carry of handguns reflects that.”
“I believe the District should appeal this decision, as our public safety needs are too important to do otherwise.”

The District’s statute is modeled after regulatory structures in place in New York, New Jersey, and Maryland—jurisdictions which have withstood constitutional challenges in federal courts.

So basically people who go the route to legally carry would ensure a bad guy could carry a gun in a target rich environment too? No shall issue, then bad guys couldn't carry either.

 

[DC-W]

WaPo at it again. Story sets it up as if "may issue" is the bees knees
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...f733c4-fe2c-11e4-805c-c3f407e5a9e9_story.html

 

[FrankZ]

If only the founders hadn't put that pesky "inside the home" right after "shall not be infringed". We wouldn't have all this questioning then.

 

[DC-W]

If only the founders hadn't put that pesky "inside the home" right after "shall not be infringed". We wouldn't have all this questioning then.

I heard the 2A was a giant typo. Had to do with muskets and shooting darts or something.

 

[swinokur]

Why does DC continue to argue that they are special? Law abiding citizens are no more of a risk to anyone than any other jurisdiction. dignitary or VIP not withstanding

oh never mind...

 

[mayor_quimby]

WaPo at it again. Story sets it up as if "may issue" is the bees knees
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...f733c4-fe2c-11e4-805c-c3f407e5a9e9_story.html

D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) said Tuesday that her office was still reviewing legal options, but she vowed “to fight to ensure the District has the safest gun laws in the nation.”

“Today, D.C. is safer than it has been in years, and we will not retreat from that progress,” she said in a statement.

Im on a The Wire kick... I see this being due to Hamsterdam.



Sad quotes from the article :

DC use to have common sense no nonsense gun laws. I'm sorry to say but the court is going to make the streets flow red.

1st amendment doesn't directly and indiscriminately kill innocent people.

 

[DC-W]

Im on a The Wire kick... I see this being due to Hamsterdam.



Sad quotes from the article :

The irony is that there are more legal guns on the street.

 

[jbrown50]

Why does DC continue to argue that they are special? Law abiding citizens are no more of a risk to anyone than any other jurisdiction. dignitary or VIP not withstanding

oh never mind...

It's for the children, um..... DIGNITARIES!