A federal judge who last week blasted the District of Columbia’s demand that people cite a reason for a permit to carry a weapon outside their home on Thursday refused the city’s request to stay his ruling.
U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. announced his decision at the same time he set two important dates.
By June 22, the Second Amendment Foundation and the other plaintiffs must file their arguments opposing the city’s additional request for a stay pending appeal, and then by June 26 the city must respond.
“The Second Amendment Foundation is pleased that the court ruled immediately against the city and has forced them to start issuing carry permits,” said SAF spokesman Alan Gottlieb.
“By now they should realize that when we say we will do everything in our legal power to force them to recognize that people have Second Amendment rights we mean it.”
Scullin’s ruling said the city’s demand that concealed carry permit applications “provide justification” for why residents want to protect themselves “impinges on plaintiff’s Second Amendment right to bear arms.”
Gottlieb pointed out that bearing arms is a right, “not a government-regulated privilege subject to arbitrary discretion.”
“This case isn’t about making a political statement, but about making the District of Columbia comply with an earlier court ruling, and with the Constitution,” he said.
Under the judge’s schedule, attorneys for both sides will be in court July 7 to discuss the city’s motion for a stay pending appeal.
Just a day earlier, SAF spokesman Dave Workman explained the problem appears to be city officials, not police.
“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.
Critics have charged that the city’s requirement for a “good reason” for a permit 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.”
When district officials sought a stay, the SAF argued the city should be found 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.
Gottlieb, the SAF founder, said the city is “pretending that they do not understand what the court has ruled.”
Workman noted 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.”
from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/05/29/judge-rejects-d-c-request-to-delay-gun-ruling/
from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/05/28/judge-rejects-d-c-request-to-delay-gun-ruling/
No comments:
Post a Comment