How D.C. Plans To (Not) Comply With U.S. Supreme Court Ruling Striking Down Gun Ban
By now, everyone knows that D.C.'s law banning possession of firearms in your residence has been found unconstitutional. So how does D.C. plan to respond? Very poorly.
I've never been a anti-gun type of person but I just didn't agree with the Supreme Court's take on this issue. But, now it is the law of the land, and it should be followed. D.C. apparently is going to do everything they can to make sure they have to go back to court again. They are preparing emergency legislation to allow privacte citizens to own a handgun if they (1) have no criminal record, verified through fingerprint background checks (2) pay a fee (3) pass a written examination; (4) and pass ballistic testing (what does this mean?). Is this reasonable regulation? Probably not. And, to really irritate the NRA, you cannot own a semi-automatic pistol - only revolvers I assume. I don't think this is what the Sup. Ct. had in mind when they said that D.C. is free to outlaw "unusual and dangerous" pistols. But, what good is a gun if it isn't dangerous anyway? To top it off, you are only allowed to use the pistol for immediate defense - it will be illegal to possess the pistol outside your residence - even in on your own porch.
What does all this mean? Job security for lawyers.
