|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
DC: D.C. can require gun applicants to provide a ‘good reason’ for now
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"A federal appeals court has ordered a stay of a judge’s ruling in a challenge to the District’s gun laws.:
"The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia temporarily blocked a decision made last month by U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. that stopped the District from enforcing a key provision of its gun laws. That provision requires a person to state a 'good reason' for carrying a weapon in order to obtain a permit from police."
"The stay, granted late Friday, is a minor victory for the District in the ongoing court battle over its gun laws." ... |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(6/15/2015)
|
| Maybe D.C. needs an applicant that's taken the time to document several months of DCPD response times to 911 calls for violent crimes in progress. A couple of hours of a judge - and better, a jury - listening to them with screened time lines might change some folks' minds. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| As an individual, I believe, very strongly, that handguns should be banned and that there should be stringent, effective control of other firearms. However, as a judge, I know full well that the question of whether handguns can be sold is a political one, not an issue of products liability law, and that this is a matter for the legislatures, not the courts. The unconventional theories advanced in this case (and others) are totally without merit, a misuse of products liability laws. — Judge Buchmeyer, Patterson v. Gesellschaft, 1206 F.Supp. 1206, 1216 (N.D. Tex. 1985) |
|
|
