Broke down and registered thru a throwaway address:
Earlier Today
And the report on today:Gun Bill Could Strip D.C. Of Control
Congress Weighs Repealing Ban On Semiautomatics
By Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, September 9, 2008; B01
Congress plans to take up a bill this week that would repeal the District's gun-registration requirements and make it easier for residents to legally buy semiautomatic weapons, raising alarm among city officials that the measure would effectively end local gun control.
Chiefs of the D.C. police, the Capitol Police, the Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies are expected to testify against the bill during a House hearing today. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) plans to introduce a substitute bill that would simply mandate that D.C.'s gun laws conform to a recent Supreme Court ruling that struck down the city's 32-year-old ban on handguns.
But the tougher legislation is likely to prevail in the House, according to congressional sources and supporters and opponents of the bill. It has won the backing of 48 Democrats, many facing reelection in strongly pro-gun areas, and is expected to pick up broad support among Republicans.
The legislation has four main goals. It would repeal the D.C. ban on semiautomatic pistols and rifles; eliminate the city's gun-registration requirements; allow District residents to purchase guns in Virginia and Maryland; and abolish the regulation that guns kept at home be unloaded and either disassembled or fitted with trigger locks.
Opponents of the legislation said it could have even more far-reaching effects because of what they termed its vague provisions.
"You could drive a truck through this language," said Peter Nickles, acting D.C. attorney general. He noted that the bill would bar the D.C. government from passing any laws that would "unduly burden" residents wanting to have or use firearms as long as they met federal requirements.
"I'm very concerned that, under that legislation, the gun-rights advocates could challenge almost any restriction we've placed on gun ownership," Nickles said. Opponents said they feared that if the bill became law, people could carry loaded semiautomatic weapons or .50-caliber sniper rifles in the city.
But supporters said such worries were wildly exaggerated.
"That is a desperate attempt to mislead both members of Congress and the lawful residents of the District of Columbia," said Chris W. Cox, the chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association. "There's nothing in this legislation, nor in the intent of this legislation, that would allow people to carry loaded firearms outside of their home."
The bill is the latest in a series of efforts by Congress to overturn the District's strict gun laws. The measure was in response to the Supreme Court's ruling in June that the District's law was too restrictive and violated Second Amendment rights.
After that ruling, the District replaced the ban with temporary legislation that permitted residents to register revolvers for self-defense in the home. But the city continued to put numerous restrictions on handgun ownership.
Another D.C. law continues to ban machine guns and includes a broad definition of such weapons, encompassing most semiautomatic arms. Magazine-loaded semiautomatic pistols, the type of weapons commonly carried by police officers, are the most popular handguns on the market.
D.C. officials point out that the Supreme Court left room for the city to continue to regulate guns and that the justices did not delve into the issue of semiautomatic weapons.
But supporters of the bill accused the D.C. government of flouting the court decision.
"The bill that I've introduced is a direct attempt to restore Second Amendment rights, and this is its sole objective," said Rep. Travis Childers (D-Miss.) in a statement.
The D.C. Council has already scheduled hearings this month on its gun regulations. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) wrote last week to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, asking them to allow the city to rewrite its own laws.
But Pelosi decided to act after Republicans indicated that they could gather enough signatures to bring a D.C. gun bill to the floor. Although Democrats have a 37-seat advantage in the House, dozens of party members are strong gun-rights proponents, reflecting opinion in their districts.
Facing the possibility of being outflanked just weeks before the election, House Democrats introduced their own legislation. The Democratic leadership has promised to bring it to a vote, several congressional sources said.
"It's something a number of our members have indicated they support," said Brendan Daly, a spokesman for Pelosi. "There's some concern, obviously, among leadership about violating the District's sovereignty . . . so they're trying to work that out and see where we go from here."
Cox, the NRA lobbyist, said the organization would be scoring legislators on how they vote on the bill. "This is our number one legislative priority," he said.
Although the bill is expected to pass in the House, possibly as soon as this week, the outcome is less clear in the Senate. Legislation often faces more procedural hurdles in that chamber, and Congress is expected to adjourn Sept. 26.
If the bill became law, it could create numerous complications for the D.C. government. The city's gun-registration law includes a variety of regulations that would be thrown out, according to proponents and supporters of the bill.
Congressional staffers said the D.C. government would be permitted to establish a new system for gun registration, as long as it did not "unduly burden" residents seeking to purchase guns.
Link
And then two editorials by the Washington Compost:At Hearing, D.C. Police Officials Challenge Proposed Gun Bill
Chief Lanier Says Legislation Would Put City at Risk
By Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, September 9, 2008; 4:23 PM
D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier testified today that a bill under consideration by Congress would allow residents to carry loaded semi-automatic rifles in the District, creating a heightened risk of a terrorist attack.
"Imagine how difficult it will be for law enforcement to safeguard the public, not to mention the new president at the inaugural parade, if carrying semi-automatic rifles were to suddenly become legal in Washington," the chief told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Lanier was the main witness at the hearing, which featured heated exchanges over the city's crime record and the impact of the bill. The chief of the Capitol Police, Phillip D. Morse, also testified against the legislation, although he said it would not change the federal ban on guns at the Capitol. (That ban does not apply to law enforcement officers on official duties).
The gun legislation, introduced by Rep. Travis Childers (Miss.), a conservative Democrat, seeks to make it easier for D.C. residents to own firearms by abolishing the city's gun registration requirements and permitting ownership of semi-automatic pistols and rifles. It also allows District residents to purchase guns in Virginia and Maryland and scraps a regulation that firearms in homes be kept unloaded and safeguarded except in cases of imminent danger.
The bill's proponents say it will bring the District in line with a Supreme Court decision in June that struck down the city's 32-year-old ban on handgun ownership. Speakers at today's hearing said residents needed more access to firearms in order to defend themselves.
"Clearly the D.C. gun law has failed, in terms of trying to hold down crime in this city," said Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.).
Proponents of the new bill say that it does not allow people to carry loaded semi-automatics outside their homes. But D.C. officials say the measure is so vague it will make nearly any local gun control virtually impossible.
The committee is expected to vote tomorrow on a substitute measure offered by Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.). It orders the District to bring its gun laws in line with the Supreme Court ruling, while reflecting the need to protect homeland security. Legislators are expected to offer amendments that would make the bill resemble the Childers measure.
Congressional sources on both sides of the issue expect the stronger language in the Childers bill to eventually prevail and pass the House. It is unclear whether the bill would pass the Senate before it finishes its session Sept. 26.
Link
andThe House's Stickup
Democrats agree to consider legislation stripping the District of the right to regulate guns.
Monday, September 8, 2008; A16
HOUSE DEMOCRATS make much of their support for the right of the District to self-government. Too bad they are willing to sacrifice this basic tenet of American democracy to the political self-interests of members cowed by the powerful gun lobby. How else to explain a planned vote on legislation so extreme it would strip the District of all power to regulate guns? Since appeals for home rule don't appear to be persuasive these days, let's hope that concern about safety and security in the nation's capital kills this bad bill.
H.R. 6691 is the latest effort by the National Rifle Association to wrest jurisdiction over local gun legislation from the District's elected officials. It comes as city officials are in the midst of formulating permanent legislation to comply with the landmark Supreme Court ruling overturning the city's long-standing ban on handguns. Sponsors of the measure, 47 conservative Democrats and five Republicans, say that D.C. officials can't be trusted and so they are acting to ensure Second Amendment rights for city residents. It's a maddening argument considering that none of those who signed on to the bill would ever stomach letting Congress dictate local law to their constituents.
Equally troubling is that the bill goes beyond the scope of the ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller authorizing gun possession for self-defense in the home. The majority opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia specified that a range of gun regulations are "presumptively lawful." But, if sponsors of H.R. 6691 have their way, the District would be barred from passing any law that would "prohibit, constructively prohibit, or unduly burden" gun ownership by anyone not barred by existing (and weak) federal gun laws. That would mean that the District couldn't require a vision test or shooting proficiency or education about gun safety for children. Gun registration would be abolished, as would the ban on carrying weapons -- even military-style rifles -- in public. It's a scary scenario in a city where political protests, presidential motorcades and visits by foreign dignitaries are routine.
The only reason this bill has advanced is because the NRA has threatened to withhold endorsements from conservative Democrats in tough races this year. Faced with a threat by Democrats to sign on to a Republican effort to bring a similar measure straight to the floor, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) caved in to demands for a hearing tomorrow before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. But it's not too late for the House leadership to decide they have better things to do than rewriting the D.C. Code -- and usurping the rights of city residents.
Link
Some random commentary:D.C. Gun Battle: Congress Vs. Zoning
What was that business about the Supreme Court having the last word?
The Supremes' decision ending the District's three-decade experiment with banning handguns appears to have created a bonanza for new gun laws and the politicians and lobbyists who write them.
Even as the D.C. government moves to place such strict limits on the city's new gun freedom as to render the court's decision largely moot, Congress is stepping in to try to prevent the District from taking any steps that might push back at the Supreme Court ruling.
This week, as Congress makes a cameo reappearance before adjourning again for the fall campaign season, the House is expected to move quickly to try to slam the door shut on Mayor Adrian Fenty and Attorney General Peter Nickles' efforts to maintain a ban on many of the handgun uses that are permitted in the rest of the country.
Most House Republicans and more than 50 House Democrats have joined in support of a bill that would once again stomp all over D.C. home rule by declaring that the District is "unduly restricting lawful handgun possession" and concluding that "legislation is required to correct the District of Columbia's law." How the congressfolk--some of whom pretend to be in favor of D.C. voting rights--justify laughing in the general direction of lawmaking by duly elected local officials may seem hard to fathom, but hey, that's what Congress does for its entertainment. Whether it's needle exchanges, taxi fare systems or gun rights, whenever members of Congress want to send a message back home by taking a tough stand that won't have the slightest impact on their own constituents, they play with the District.
The bill on the Hill would completely undermine Fenty's efforts, forcing the city to allow military-style semi-automatic weapons, preventing the city from discouraging gun ownership, even repealing the city's ban on gun ownership by those under the age of 21. There would be no gun registration rules, no requirements that guns be kept locked up.
But the city has a secret weapon with which it will attempt to return fire. Sure, the city is already being sued over its effort to limit the impact of the Supreme Court decision. And after a long, expensive fight, the city is likely to lose that one too. But the District's other tool may prove harder for the feds to combat: The zoning process.
The arcane, byzantine zoning system can and is being used to determine where and when gun dealers might set up business in the city, and with enough clever work, the city hopes to be able to stop just about any legal gun trade from taking place within its boundaries. The city is to hold hearings Sept. 29 on a proposed set of zoning rules that would make permanent the emergency restrictions that the city imposed in July. These rules essentially limit any gun sales so severely that you'd have to be a world-champion zoning lawyer to find a sliver of land on which you could open a gun shop--and even then you'd need to get special permission from the city.
In theory, Congress could put those regulations through the federal shredder too, and perhaps it will come to that someday, but the District can keep this game going for quite some time. In a death match between the lords of the Hill and the professional "No"-sayers of the D.C. government, my money's on the District bureaucrats. Just think of all the times you needed something from a D.C. employee and you got that unique "Try to make me" empty stare in return. This one's going to be a whole lot of fun to watch.
1.) Why is it the police are always universally opposed to these moves? It's certainly not public safety, because loosening gun laws doesn't result in nightly shootings and slaughter, etc.
2.) DC gets it up the ass for it's dickishness. They tried to subvert the Supremes' ruling by once again playing semantics games over what is acceptable for sale within DC; forgetting that the Federal City is ruled by Congress; and Congress is in an election season.
This bill is essentially a final "screw you" to the District government -- you'll note that in Fisher's column, he suggests that the DC government try to use Zoning laws to prevent gun dealers from opening in DC; but that would be rendered moot by the House bill, which allows DC residents to buy guns in MD or VA.
Essentially, DC lost this fight and badly. If they continue to be dicks, I can imagine Congress voting to strip DC of self rule.
