There, fixed it...
Honestly, did we expect these enemies domestic to do anything else?
Posted on 07/18/2008 6:12:29 AM PDT by marktwain
Mayor Adrian Fenty and his feisty attorney general, Peter Nickles, stood on the steps of the Wilson Building this week ostensibly to announce how the District will comply with the Supreme Court's rejection of Washington's ban on handguns. But really, they were delivering very much the opposite message: With only the narrowest of exceptions, we're sticking with our gun ban. Don't like it? Sue us.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Their flaunting of SCOTUS’ Heller ruling is just absurd. I hope some federal judge throws the lot of them into jail for contempt.
That would be a good start.
There, fixed it...
Honestly, did we expect these enemies domestic to do anything else?
“Sue us”??? That’s already been done. The next step is to have you locked-up for contempt of court.
Bury their remains in a shallow unmarked grave.
9:31:50
Post of the day.
Well now, that's just brilliant. If the court didn't intend for you to have a loaded gun around the house, then it must have intended for you to carry it on your person. So, D.C. officials should immediately amend their gun laws to reflect this reasoning.
It isn't much of a self-defense weapon if it isn't loaded--about on a par with a medium size frozen root vegetable.
Mayor Adrian Fenty and "feisty" Nickles: The people have a Constitutional right to vote. But only if they have good vision and can demonstrate that they can read and understand the ballot. Plus, we will have a police officer present who will verify that the people can properly mark a ballot, and he will keep a copy of the ballot they marked for future reference.
Yeah, Justices Roberts and Scalia fully intended people to confront home invaders and assorted other bad guys with an unloaded weapons, using it as a club.
Yeah, that's just brilliant, Nicklehead.
See my tagline.
“But Nickles, the acting attorney general, said that “it’s clear the Supreme Court didn’t intend for you to have a loaded gun around the house.”
Very interesting reading of the Supreme Court’s decision, Nickles. Did you learn anything in law school?
How about deprivation of civil rights and conspiracy to deprive civil rights.
I would think this is an extremely viable premis given circumstancesand group involvementThis not a valid law they are trying to enact in the face of a SCOTUS ruling. There for this malicious in intent, Sue not only for $$$ but if convicted they can spend some time where they reall belong: in Jail!
How about deprivation of civil rights and conspiracy to deprive civil rights.
I would think this is an extremely viable premis given circumstances and group involvement. This not a valid law they are trying to enact in the face of a SCOTUS ruling. Therefore this malicious in intent, Sue not only for $$$ but if convicted they can spend some time where they really belong: in Jail!
Know what you call an unloaded handgun? A hammer.
“I don’t think the court thought this was going to become a Wild West scene.”
They’ve had a Wild West scene in D.C. for decades, gun control laws notwithstanding. The fact is, they don’t want D.C. citizens defending themselves. Citizens are expected to lie down and be passive victims of the D.C. criminal class. The criminal class inside the government is protecting the criminal class outside the government.
People of DC. Just buy your guns and dare them to stop you from legally possessing firearms as a FEDERAL RIGHT.
You will not be the criminals here. The criminals are those who defy a USSC ruling that defines the law of the land.
Mayor Adrian Fenty and "feisty" Nickles: The people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. However, it is clear that this was never intended to mean that the person had to actually be at home. And we will have police officers search all homes for guns and we will keep a copy of all bank records pertaining to possible purchase of firearms just in case the people actually try to purchase guns. We want to make the indelible point that the law means what we say it means, not what the Supreme Court says it means.
Anarchy in the DC.
Which was what I just said. The relevant US Code sections are as follows:
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 242
§ 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
- TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 241
§ 241. Conspiracy against rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured— They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Anarchy is “self government”. This is tyranny.
This is the very arrogance of government that the founding fathers knew would happen so they created the 2nd amendment in the first place.... irony you just cant make up.
Peter Nickles needs a refund on the tuition he paid for law school.....they didn’t actually teach him anything. Either that or he’s too stupid to have absorbed it - either way - he’s a complete a$$!!!
As well they should. It's been obvious for years that the District cannot govern itself. The incompetence just shines through.
They can’t buy them in DC because there are no dealers and they can’t buy them outside of DC because a FFL in DC to ship to is necessary.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Treat Them to a Good Dose of Lead(Why the 'Wild West' was not what Liberals claim-my title)
***I can only imagine the fallout if but one state were to interpret Roe v. Wade with the same blatant disregard for the SCOTUS ruling that D.C. is showing Heller.***
Women and minorities hardest hit.
Scum like this don't deserve the real estate that the grave would take up.
I’d say turn them into hog food, but I like pigs. I wouldn’t want to do that to ‘em...
That is one incredibly good article you posted then.
Maybe it’s time for a repost...
Better yet, e-mail to a couple of big-name Liberal rags.
“Don’t like it? Sue us.”
I wish that I lived in DC so that I could. I don’t think that Title 18, Section 242 means much to Fenty, but it should mean something to his idiot AG:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/crim/242fin.htm
“Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.”
You boys can be jailed for violating someone’s civil rights, and if you use even the mere threat of force you can get up to 10 years in Club Fed.
Statist @$$holes.
Not for those who already own firearms, because they bought them while resident elsewhere in the past, or for those (like, for instance, Congressmen) who are dual residents and can presently buy firearms outside of DC.
Nonetheless, for most DC residents, you're correct. And given the impossibility of complying with the law, I'd like to see the Supreme Court toss out the federal law that requires you to take possession of a purchased handgun from a FFL in your state, and restrict such purchases of long guns to your state and one that is contigous to it. Why, for example, should I (a Texas resident with a CHL and about a dozen guns) not be able to buy and take with me a handgun or rifle in, say, Maine or Connecticut if I happen to be there and pay for a firearm that I want?
I wonder if some bright lawyer can - in light of this open and purposeful defiance of federal law and the Constitution - ask for and obtain an injunction against the enforcement of ALL DC gun laws on behalf of his client?
Are there any FReeper attorneys who know how these things work?
Thus proving that those provisions of GCA'68 are clearly an unconstitutional infringement. Anyone care to start another lawsuit?
...And yes, I am yelling!
Enough of this Bravo Sierra already!
Finesse??? Is that the new PC phrase for giving the finger?
In that case, I double finesse the DC government!
No but imagine if some city said it would continue to ban all abortions, after Roe v Wade? The screaming and gnashing of teeth would have been heard all the way to the moon. The intervening vacuum notwithstanding.
But therein lies the Catch 22. There are no federally licensed firearms dealers in the District. It's a federal crime for you to purchase, or anyone to sell you, a handgun in a state of which you are not a resident. Isn't that special?
However in general it is not illegal to purchase a long gun in such a state. So they would need to get an Ugly Black Gun, or a Serious social purposes shotgun.
Maybe something like this?
(That's just as you can purchase it New In the Box, the image is from Mossberg's website. Unfortunately Ugly Black Guns which can fire 12 rounds or more without reloading are banned (as are all other guns tha can do that)
Another categorical restriction of the 2nd, imo.
Where can we send our money so us good guys can pay constitutional lawyers to sue, sue, sue, sue, and sue stalinists imperialists clothes right off?
The Rats want gun owners to follow the law, yet they refuse to follow the law. Typical liberal hypocrisy.
Someday the Republicans need to grow a set and just say to hell with laws, the way the libs do.
“What, you say the court says you can’t ban abortions? Sorry, we just don’t see it that way.”
“What, we can’t hold terrorists at Guantanamo without legal jurisprudence? Sorry, we just don’t see it that way.”
“What, there is a ban on drilling off shore? Sorry, we just don’t see it that way.”
The Republican middle digit is far too under-utilized. In the meantime, Fenty needs to see what a DC gun owner can really do with a gun, up close, and personal. It’s high noon, pardner.
The real tragedy will come when some poor SOB actually exercises his right to self defense and shoots an intruder. You know there will never be such a thing as a “clean shoot” in the eyes of these contemptuous politicians.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.