May 18, 2015

Scullin on DC's 'Good Reason' Clause: B@&&S*&^

This is big news out of the district of columbia... probably bigger than the news of Chicago being forced to adopt conceal carry. Months ago, plaintiffs sued the Washington DC because of their ban on concealed carry. This means that citizens, who have a fundamental right to keep and bear arms in the United States- were banned from exercising their rights in the capital. The Plaintiffs, with help from the Second Amendment Foundation- successfully sued Washington DC; the judges citing that DC has no valid excuse under the color of law or a vested interest in 'public safety' to deny individuals their fundamental rights. Gun control advocates, under the new name 'gun safety advocates' argued their case for gun control in court, and then lost.

To comply with the new ruling, Washington instituted a conceal carry program. In this program, you would have to have training within the capital (hint: no trainers were 'certified'), pay exhoberant fees, get finger printed, be interviewed, and provide a 'good enough reason' to carry a gun. Self-defense was not a valid reason, and there should be no reason giving for exercising your fundamental rights.

Second Amendment Foundation requested an immediate injunction against the enclave of Washington DC and it was granted today. Should DC continue to enforce their defiance of our constitution, they will be fined. Quite honestly, they should be removed from office if they do- and then remove them from office in the first place. Scullin, the judge said that the restrictions were unreasonable and impossible to obtain, permanently harming the plaintiffs and law abiding citizens. The court agreed that these burdens violated the 2nd amendment, and that the arguments plaintiffs made would likely succeed in reasoning that the violations are illegal.

In a rare ruling, the panel also argued that irreparable harm is being committed each and every day this law is on the books, thus, an injunction will be filed immediately. However- this does not strike down the stringent requirements of the law outside the scope of may issue carry, meaning that the enclave will continue to make the lives of its citizens a living hell for those who wish to exercise their rights. Plaintiffs seeked an injunction narrow in scope, targeting the 'good reason' clause. Judges agree that Washington DC is full of it, and in violation of our founding principles.

This means that, in addition to training, costs, finger printing and interviews, all of which are illegal- we move from may issue carry to somewhere in between that mode of carry and shall issue carry. Arbitrary and piss poor arguments can no longer be used in DC to deny you your rights. If Washington decides to appeal to the Supreme Court, the injunction sticks- the panel isn't buying DC's arguments. On July 7, parties will meet to discuss expediting the schedule of court hearings to resolve the case.

New Jersey, Massachussetts, Connecticut, Maryland, New York, Hawaii and New Jersey- your asses are on watch.

No comments: