Great, as far as it goes but this notion that exercising a Constitutionally enumerated right should be subject to licensing is abhorrent and must be fought still.
It wont matter. DC cops are the dumbest bunch of cops on the planet....well not as dumb as federal ATF....but REAL dumb. I don’t care if you are legal ccw or not in DC, it will take about 3 years for the information to get down to the street-level bureaucrat.
Chief Investigative Reporter @FOX5NewsDC. Author of Emily Gets Her Gun #EmilysGun. The fight is for freedom.
Stay tuned- I'm writing a story with the details on the #Palmer decision -- and how DC will be forced to allow gun carry rights.
Does this mean NY and NJ will have to issue non-resident permits?
Excellent news, but we must keep fighting until guns are treated the same as books.
i am sure libtard govt will appeal.
T5his judgement will ALSO allow the carrying of millions of AR-15 rifles on the Capitol Mall.
Does that mean that, say, a Florida carry permit is now good for DC?
Here is a link to the decision
Here is the VA Alert issued by VCDL
And Liberty marches on - DC becomes a part of America again - at least for now.
The Circuit Court in DC has just ruled in Palmer vs. DC that DCs ban on the carry of handguns IN PUBLIC by citizens (both residents AND non-residents) is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Better yet, they said DC cannot enforce their current ban AT ALL until such time as they pass a licensing scheme that allows citizens to fairly exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms!
Im not an attorney, and have not yet heard from our attorneys on this ruling, but it sure looks to me like I could drive to DC tonight and carry while Im there. Not just concealed, but CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY - openly OR concealed!
I am not suggesting anyone do so until we have some crystal clear clarity on this.
I imagine that DC might appeal this verdict to the Supreme Court. We should know soon enough.
Here is a link to the announcement on Arsenal Attorneys web site:
DC Circuit Court Overturns Ban on Right to Carry Firearms
Today, July 26, 2014, the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia has overturned the DC’s ban on the carrying of firearms in public. An excerpt follows and the full opinion can be downloaded from the link below this blog entry.
“In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly . . . the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms. 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.”
Here are the two code sections that have been STRUCK DOWN (first affects DC residents, second affects everyone, including Virginia residents):
§ 7-2502.02. Registration of certain firearms prohibited.
(a) A registration certificate shall not be issued for a:
(4) Pistol not validly registered to the current registrant in the District prior to September 24, 1976, except that the prohibition on registering a pistol shall not apply to:
(A) Any organization that employs at least one commissioned special police officer or other employee licensed to carry a firearm and that arms the employee with a firearm during the employee’s duty hours;
(B) A police officer who has retired from the Metropolitan Police Department;
(C) Any person who seeks to register a pistol for use in self-defense within that person’s home; or
(D) A firearms instructor, or an organization that employs a firearms instructor, for the purpose of conducting firearms training.
§ 22-4504. Carrying concealed weapons; possession of weapons during commission of crime of violence; penalty.
(a) No person shall carry within the District of Columbia either openly or concealed on or about their person, a pistol, or any deadly or dangerous weapon capable of being so concealed. Whoever violates this section shall be punished as provided in § 22-4515, except that:
(1) A person who violates this section by carrying a pistol, or any deadly or dangerous weapon, in a place other than the person’s dwelling place, place of business, or on other land possessed by the person, shall be fined not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both; or
(2) If the violation of this section occurs after a person has been convicted in the District of Columbia of a violation of this section or of a felony, either in the District of Columbia or another jurisdiction, the person shall be fined not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.
Heres a link to the ruling in PDF format (thanks to Arsenal Attorneys):
A heartfelt thanks to the Second Amendment Foundation (saf.org) for bringing this suit and winning it!
Now, whos got the champagne?
When you have to ask permission and the government has the option of turning you down, it’s not a right.
Great news. Hopefully a similar suit will result in MA being forced to end their “local authority”where the local chief decides if you get a permit to carry in public or a permit to hunt/go to the range only.
i.e Springfield residents are usually given a permit to only carry in you house or unloaded and locked to the range, while one town over they issue a “all lawful purpose” permit that let’s you carry where legal. The person with the ALP permit can carry in any city or town they want, even one next door where residents are denied that right simply because the chief dosen’t want citizens carrying firearms.
One of the most important cases of the year!
I wonder if this will void the conviction of that poor guy who had an empty shot shell in his car, or the guy going to the VA(?) who had a pistol locked in his trunk.
watch the murder rate plummet!
“...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. ...”
Can this be used as a basis for establishing reciprocity with other states’ CCW? I.e. would my Texas CCW be good in D.C.?
Can anybody explain why this decision came from a federal judge in New York instead of DC?
I saw nine justices sitting. Nine. Count them. Nine.
See above topic!
DC police chief had something good to say about this ....