D.C. vs. the 2nd Amendment

WASHINGTON – “More Guns, Less Crime” was the title of a landmark study and bestselling book in 1998 praised by such luminaries as Milton Friedman.

So, after all these years, why is the District of Columbia going to court to fight tooth and nail to prevent citizens from carrying guns?

“It’s not the cops who are doing this; it is city government, the way I see it,” said Dave Workman, spokesman for the Second Amendment Foundation.

“The police department may be stuck between a rock and a hard place. They’ve got to do what the administration tells them to do,” he told WND.

His group’s effort to protect Second Amendment rights in the nation’s capital has turned into a courtroom saga.

On Monday, Federal Judge Frederick J. Scullin ruled the Washington, D.C., concealed-carry law unconstitutional because it forced people to prove they had a “good reason” to need a gum.

Critics said that was the reason so few permits have been issued, and the judge agreed.

Scullin said, “[F]or all intents and purposes, this requirement makes it impossible for the overwhelming majority of law-abiding citizens to obtain licenses to carry handguns in public for self-defense, thereby depriving them of their Second Amendment right to bear arms.”

Attorneys for the district responded by filing a request for a stay on Monday’s ruling, claiming the “court misinterpreted and misapplied the relevant case law.”

The Second Amendment Foundation responded to that by filing a motion Wednesday asking Judge Scullin to find the District of Columbia in contempt of court.

That was spurred by a letter sent by the Washington Metropolitan Police Department to an applicant that said the city would not issue him a permit for at least 90 days, to give city attorneys time to clarify the ruling.

Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb said the city is “pretending that they do not understand what the court has ruled.”

Workman agreed, the ruling was crystal clear.

“It appears they are trying to stall,” he told WND. “This is the second time we’ve had to go to court to block what we think is an intent to stall on implementing the court order.”

WND asked Workman how “the good reason” standard violated the Second Amendment.

He said, in most states, nobody has to prove they need to carry a gun.

“The reaction in D.C. seems to be people scratching their heads and asking why do we need to prove anything? It’s a civil right if I want to take a gun outside for any reason, or for no reason, just to have it with me in the event of an emergency. I have that right. The Constitution says so.”

Workman also observed the Second Amendment is part of “the Bill of Rights, not the bill of needs.”

“We’re talking about not only the right to keep arms but to bear them. The right to bear arms certainly extends beyond the front door of one’s house.”

He added, “It doesn’t make a lot of sense that the Founders would write an amendment to the Bill of Rights that would limit the right to bear arms to the confines of one’s home.”

A footnote: Judge Scullin also ruled in October 2014 that the district’s complete ban on concealed-carry was unconstitutional.

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/05/28/d-c-vs-the-2nd-amendment/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/05/27/d-c-vs-the-2nd-amendment/