[Walt45]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/us-judge-strikes-down-dc-concealed-carry-gun-law-as-likely-unconstitutional/2016/05/17/d36d35dc-1c49-11e6-8c7b-6931e66333e7_story.html

A federal judge has ruled that a key provision of the District’s new gun law is likely unconstitutional, ordering D.C. police to stop requiring individuals to show “good reason” to obtain a permit to carry a firearm on the streets of the nation’s capital.

Hopefully the people of DC can actually live under the Constitution soon.

 

[Cheezywan]

Constitution of the United States of America works for all (Legal citizens), and works both ways. Have always wondered why folks that prefer to bi-itch don't exercise their 1st amendment right to shut up? I will defend that right for them if they choose to ignore it. Is their business though.

Cheezywan

 

[nvshooter]

I would love to see DC residents start carrying heat, and for the crime rate there to drop to levels commensurate with levels in other large cities where legal carry is the law. Where would that leave the liberals' argument that guns cause crime?

 

[HarryS]

The constitution cover non-citizens as well.

One would think that the crime stats in Dc alone would be sufficient "good reason".

 

[Jammer Six]

If you believe that the rights in the Bill of Rights come, as stated, from god, and that the Bill of Rights merely recognizes them, (as opposed to granting them) then it follows that you believe those rights apply to everyone, including illegal immigrants, non-citizens and anyone else you happen to fear. It's either a god-given right or it isn't.

Otherwise, there's a massive hole in your logic, unless you believe in a god that only grants rights to a certain segment of a population born on a certain side of an imaginary line in a certain, relatively small geographic location.

 

[Tnhunter]

338 posts and not one that's been positive? I'd figure it's a record here. And yes, this one's not positive.

 

[Walt45]

If you believe that the rights in the Bill of Rights come, as stated, from god, and that the Bill of Rights merely recognizes them, (as opposed to granting them) then it follows that you believe those rights apply to everyone, including illegal immigrants, non-citizens and anyone else you happen to fear. It's either a god-given right or it isn't.

Otherwise, there's a massive hole in your logic, unless you believe in a god that only grants rights to a certain segment of a population born on a certain side of an imaginary line in a certain, relatively small geographic location.

What on God's earth does any of that have to do with the DC law?

 

[nvshooter]

The Bill of Rights codifies protections from an overbearing government that all persons, in any and every country, have as part of being a member of the human race. The Framers added the Rights to the Constitution after the People said they wanted more protections from the government than were originally written by the Framers. The Constitution as we know it was ratified on December 15, 1791. Our Founders and Framers recognized that as Americans, we were (and are) a special People in that our Rights do indeed come from God, and not from men. Bashir Assad and Kim jung-Un know this too, but it will be a cold day in helsinki when they surrender their thrones to the People of their respective nations.

America is a special nation in all the world. We are the most Free of any People on the planet. That requires a special degree of behavior in our society. Those of us who are born here are conferred our Rights upon birth. Those who come later must qualify for these Rights, but not all of them. Any man is granted protection against the government arbitrarily imprisoning or killing him. Any man is granted the Right to not crucify himself in court by virtue of testimony against himself, such testimony precipitated by force or threat. But not every man is granted the Right to own a weapon by virtue of his presence in our country. If that was the case a radical, hate-filled dicktaster of dubious national origin could bring in hundreds of thousands of foreigners (mostly young males of military age) with a hatred of Freedom, arm them with military-type weapons and foment the destruction of the country. Oh, wait. That is happening in America-- and as we speak...

 

[MikeG]

Jammer six, keep your posts on topic, and let's refrain from insulting other people's religious beliefs, shall we?

I deleted the last line in your post as not relevant to the discussion, and inflammatory.

 

[Walt45]

If you believe that the rights in the Bill of Rights come, as stated, from god, and that the Bill of Rights merely recognizes them, (as opposed to granting them) then it follows that you believe those rights apply to everyone, including illegal immigrants, non-citizens and anyone else you happen to fear. It's either a god-given right or it isn't.

Otherwise, there's a massive hole in your logic, unless you believe in a god that only grants rights to a certain segment of a population born on a certain side of an imaginary line in a certain, relatively small geographic location.

So does the Bill of Rights not apply to the citizens of DC?

 

[Jammer Six]

If the rights come from god, they apply to every human. That is the true source of fear for the Dear Leader.

That is my position, and the reason I believe every human has the right to carry a firearm. The only valid restrictions I would recognize is age or mental illness.

There's nothing "special" about Americans, except perhaps the Ugly American syndrome and the idea that everyone understands English if it's spoken with sufficient volume.

I was responding to Cheezywan as was, I believe, HarryS in his first statement.

 

[chevwilliam]

Due to the "Unique" Legal conditions in the designation of the 'District of Columbia' (D.C.), some do and some don't.
Yes, the First and Second SHOULD apply to All CITIZENS and almost all residents fo D.C.

There are some details that don't apply to D.C. Residents nor Citizens such as they do not Elect Representative nor Senators to Congress, as Congress Directly is their Governing body except as delegated by laws since passed. They DO vote for President, and for Local officials such as mayor and such. They do have a none voting monitor in the House of Representatives and, I believe, one in the Senate.

It is probably very Frustrating that they do not have the Right to vote on their own major Laws yet can sue in Federal Courts over Then.

Better than the past but nowhere near Equal to the Rest of the USA. The 'Government Employees' try to live in the surrounding States and commute to work, except for Elected Political Office Holders who legally maintain two residence, one in D.C. and one in their home district, which is why the Elected Office Holders still Vote in their home districts.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

 

[nvshooter]

There's nothing "special" about Americans...

No, but we are exceptional. America was the very first nation that put the power of the People over the power of government. America was the very first nation that instituted the vote by the People to decide who would govern us-- by our consent, of course. America was the very first nation that did not tax those who would become wealthy to such a degree that they would stay among the poor. In America, the son is not guilty of the sins of the father. In America, a common kid can go to Harvard, Yale or the community college down the road. Only the elite go to colleges in most of Europe. You won't find a sharecropper's daughter at the Sorbonne...

If Americans are-- and by extension America is-- not special, why do so many from around the world go so far as to risk death to get here? Because America is special. And so are the People...

 

[MikeG]

I will be glad to see DC residents gain the right to defend themselves, without undue, petty, politically motivated obstructions.

 

[Jammer Six]

America was the very first nation that put the power of the People over the power of government.

No, we weren't. We were just the first people that needed to do it in writing.

 

[shreck]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/us-judge-strikes-down-dc-concealed-carry-gun-law-as-likely-unconstitutional/2016/05/17/d36d35dc-1c49-11e6-8c7b-6931e66333e7_story.html



Hopefully the people of DC can actually live under the Constitution soon.

Cool ' strike one fore sanity.

 

[BAGTIC]

Chev, Under the Constitution enfranchisement is not a "right'', it is a privilege just like driving a car. Personally I believe that the Constitution should be amended giving every adult citizen an unalienable "RIGHT" to vote.

 

[nvshooter]

No, we weren't. We were just the first people that needed to do it in writing.

If you speak of the Magna Carta, that still held that the King was omnipotent... just that his dictates would be subject to discussion and to possibly his later revision after the discussion. And do not even tire me with Hammurabi's Code. Neither of those put the power of national government into the hands of the common man. I doubt the common man and common woman in 13th Century England voted for who would be King. If memory serves, they still do not. And Hammurabi's Code was all about stabbing out the eye of the man who had stabbed out yours. Hardly a republican form of government...

 

[nvshooter]

Under the Constitution, enfranchisement is not a "right.'' It is a privilege, just like driving a car.

Incorrect. Every American without felonious conviction has the Right to vote, short of one or two extraordinary circumstances. I think these are those who are adjudged mentally unstable, have drug convictions or are fugitives from Justice.

The Right to speak freely and to vote in secret are our two primary and fundamental Rights. The Right to Own and to Use Firearms for All Purposes Moral and Just puts the teeth in the first two. Why do you think the liberals so desperately want to destroy the Second Amendment? Because its destruction will precipitate the destruction of the First Amendment. If it's two things liberals hate, it's you speaking truth to power, voting to remove power and using a firearm to press your case when the first two methods fail...

I am not a Trump supporter, but I believe him when he says that Hillarious Rotten Klantoon wants to abolish the Second Amendment. We know the Klantoons a gold medal liars. We have twenty-plus years of experience with them. Of course, Hillarious denied what Trump said. Of the two, who do you believe?

 

[Jammer Six]

If you speak of the Magna Carta, that still held that the King was omnipotent... just that his dictates would be subject to discussion and to possibly his later revision after the discussion. And do not even tire me with Hammurabi's Code. Neither of those put the power of national government into the hands of the common man. I doubt the common man and common woman in 13th Century England voted for who would be King. If memory serves, they still do not. And Hammurabi's Code was all about stabbing out the eye of the man who had stabbed out yours. Hardly a republican form of government...

You have it backwards.