Another post Heller suit heading to Cali?

So, how does one lawfully get guns into DC? Even after Heller takes effect, it’s a tough issue due to zoning:

Washington has no federally licensed gun stores, so nowhere in the city can residents buy a handgun legally.

Not true, really. There is one licensed firearms dealer in the city. One Josh Sugarmann of the anti-gun shill group the Violence Policy Center.

They can be reached at:

Violence Policy Center
1730 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
Suite 1014
Washington, DC 20036

phone (202) 822 8200

Ask them what they’re charging for transfers. If they say they don’t do them, remind them that, thanks in part to their kind’s lobbying efforts, it is typically viewed a violation of federal law to hold an FFL and not be in the business of dealing firearms.

Update: another suggestion is to get a C&R.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley:

You have a gun and I have a gun and we’ll settle in the streets.

My pacifist nature prevents me from accepting your challenge.

Via Tam, who says: Awwww. Who’s the sad clown? Who’s the sad clown?

Bazookas and black helicopters? That the best you can do? No wonder we win.

Paul Helmke looked beaten. And continues to lie about precedent. But he says it’s history and now the law of the land is clear.

Commenter Craig:

First, I don’t own a gun. I don’t have a FOID card. I don’t belong to the NRA.

But how on earth are gun laws protecting citizens? Bruce, read your own paper. How many people have been shot over the past week? Year? Yeah, that gun ban is really working.

Some gun control group spokesmonkey:

We are concerned the resources are going to be diverted to the defense of laws already on the books

And Heller Followed With Him

I think we should have shirts made for Alan Gura that say that.

S&W stock up!

A Human Right, A Civil Right: Fundamental, Pre-existing, Strictly Scrutinized, Universal, and Incorporated

We won! Now what?

Well, challenges are already filed in Chicago and here’s the Chicago Gun Case Website:

Following Thursday’s (5-4) ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects an individual civil right to keep and bear arms, and that a municipal gun ban violates that right, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) filed a federal lawsuit (complaint) challenging the City of Chicago’s long-standing handgun ban.

“Chicago’s handgun ban has failed to stop violent crime,” SAF founder Alan Gottlieb stated. “It’s time to give the Constitution a chance.”

And Kevin got to talk with Gura!

The American Hunters And Shooters Association once claimed 25,000 members. They seem to have lost some:

Pushed hard by skeptical writers in the audience, Schoenke declined to say how many members AHSA had, but said that more than a thousand members paid membership dues in the past year.

Diane Feinstein, after adjusting her carry piece, said:

I must admit as much as I knew this decision was coming, I was viscerally affected by the decision.

I remember both Justice Roberts and Justice Alito sitting in front of us and indicating how they would respect stare decisis and precedent – and this decision takes down 70 years of precedent.

Trouble is, no such precedent exists.

Bob Tuke, Senate Candidate:

The Second Amendment provides for a constitutional right of responsible gun ownership, and I support the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the absolute gun ban that had been enacted in our nation’s capital. If elected to the U.S. Senate, I will remain vigilant in upholding the right to bear arms of law abiding citizens of the United States.

More Dems like this please. And a twofer:

Russ Feingold:

I think this is a long overdue decision; I don’t think the precedent has been seriously reaffirmed in decades.

Compared to Lautenberg:

Today, President Bush’s radical Supreme Court justices put rigid ideology ahead of the safety of communities in New Jersey and across the country. This decision illustrates why I have strongly opposed extremist judicial nominees and will continue to do so in the future.

Those extremist judges with whom 73% of the population agrees!!!!!

Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership got like four supporters to show up!

CBS, your anti-gun bias is showing.

Well, one impact of Heller is honesty: Repeal the 2nd Amendment. Before, they just acted like it wasn’t there.

We’ve discussed issues with the dissent. And basically, they’re lazy. They are old, after all. For instance, some factual inaccuracies in the Heller dissents and, basically, saying we can’t change now that’s too hard.

Well, more evidence of their general laziness: Simply because it will be disruptive to existing (unconstitional) laws Breyer thinks that is a valid reason to allow the D.C. ban to stand.

That’s two Justices on the supreme court who basically said Why change what we’re doing, even if it is wrong? I though only conservatives did that?

Lots of stuff here.

NJ law chief says NJ laws not threatened by ruling

Post Heller: So What Gun Regulations Are Reasonable?

I’m thinking that telling handgunners to quit that hobby and take up stamp-collecting isn’t gonna go well with handgunners. After all, it’s probably hard to defend your family with a 19th century Queen Victoria stamp.

On Mayor Daley’s reaction to Heller:

He described America as a country of gun-lovers who export their weaponry to neighboring countries like Canada and Mexico, spreading violence to relatively peaceful areas.

Those quotes are now gone. But the google still sends you there.

Eric S. Raymond is back from his two year blogging break. I missed that guy. Looks like he’s back to get his civil disobedience on.

No, really. Over that little machine gun issue we discussed earlier. And one question has been answered:

She said it is not unusual for Blackwater to store automatic weapons because the company is licensed to sell, provide training on, or even manufacture firearms.

So, why the arrangement with the sheriff? And it seems ATF knew all along.

No Peanut Butter Heller Time for me.

Everyone is telling me their plans for celebrating this wonderful day. Sadly, I will not be. I’m sick as a dog. My celebratory drink will be Pepto-Bismol and my celebratory cigar will be hitting the sack early.

I haven’t read them yet (for reasons explained here) but David Hardy notes some errors in it, and I mean errors other than just being on the wrong side of history.

I mean, if I were a Republican running for office, I’d remind the over 70% of the population who think there is an individual right to arms exactly who appointed these four justices. Of course, they’re to blame for Souter.

Update: For some reason, I thought Stevens was a Carter appointee. Nope, a Ford guy. So, two of these bozos were Republican appointees?

This is making the McCain case pretty weak.

You’d think they would value a civil rights victory. Instead, they opt to prove they’re nothing but shills:

The Second Amendment has not been the subject of much Supreme Court discussion through the years. To the extent it has been discussed, the Court has described the Second Amendment as designed to protect the ability of the states to preserve their own sovereignty against a new and potentially overreaching national government. Based on that understanding, the Court has historically construed the Second Amendment as a collective right connected to the concept of a “well-regulated militia” rather than an individual right to possess guns for private purposes.

In Heller, the Court reinterpreted the Second Amendment as a source of individual rights. Washington D.C.’s gun control law, which bans the private possession of handguns and was widely considered the most restrictive such law in the country, became a victim of that reinterpretation.

The Court was careful to note that the right to bear arms is not absolute and can be subject to reasonable regulation. Yet, by concluding that D.C.’s gun control law was unreasonable and thus invalid, the Court placed a constitutional limit on gun control legislation that had not existed prior to its decision in Heller. It is too early to know how much of a constitutional straitjacket the new rule will create.

Let’s play spot the hysteria and spot the outright lies.

Chicago suit has been filed:

Gun Lobby Quickly Sues To Overturn Chicago Ban

That’s the headline. No where does it mention that the suing is actually going on.

Incorporation could follow.

Update: Whoops. I meant NRA as the gun lobby. Illinois State Rifle Association is on the ball.

DC presser here:

In addition, although the Court struck the safe storage provision on the ground that it was too broadly written, firearms at home should be kept either unloaded and disassembled or else locked except for use in self-defense in emergencies.

Uhm, you were just told no to that one. Don’t piss the court off.

Lots of stuff here.

A favorite: In response to Justice Stevens’ complaint that “hundreds of judges” have relied on the anti-individual rights interpretation of Miller, Scalia shot back: “their erroneous reliance upon an uncontested and virtually unreasoned case cannot nullify the reliance of millions of Americans (as our historical analysis has shown) upon the true meaning of the right to keep and bear arms.”

We’ve been doing it wrong so long, we may as well stick with it?

Press says right to arms is ‘new right’.

NRA to move on Chicago Gun Ban:

The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday’s outcome.