cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Samnospam
Advisor

Re: well you know

Don't be a puss man, just say it.
Nebrfarmr
Veteran Advisor

Are you sure?

 

So, you are trying to say, a non-resident, could walk around in DC, with any gun they wanted, without a permit, and be 'legal', in spite of the ban, because they were not 'residents' of DC?
Not according to Wiki

 Besides, the article clearly states that the employee of MM, was carrying it around, on his person, in a concealed manner.

 

The Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 was passed by the District of Columbia city council on September 24, 1976.[1] On June 26, 2008, in the historic case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court of the United States determined that the ban and trigger lock provision violate the Second Amendment. The law banned residents from owning handguns, automatic firearms, or high-capacity semi-automatic firearms, as well as prohibited possession of unregistered firearms. Exceptions to the ban were allowed for police officers and guns registered before 1976. The law also required firearms kept in the home to be "unloaded, disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock or similar device";[2] this was deemed to be a prohibition on the use of firearms for self-defense in the home.[3]

 

 

  Wiki says here, that it prohibited posession of unregistered firearms, and the article alleges they had no permit for the gun.

 

man of steel
Senior Contributor

Re: Are you sure?

Give it up Neb. After how many post??? and you still didn't get an answer and now you are going to try to school out the ignorance on the law???

 

Good luck sir

BA Deere
Honored Advisor

Re: Are you sure?

Hey Man of Steel, I think one of the reasons that Schurrbart changed his handle was because as Schnurrbart he was a bit of a liberal gun nut.  Now that libs are making a full court press against guns, he needed to change his position on guns to remain a "liberal" soooo new year, new "Snooky" and this "Snooky" beats up on guns like anyone else in his rank and file.  That is something that to remain in one`s "gang" they need to abandon their principles...I supose it makes it easier if a lib does a complete identity change.  Snooky may have even shaved off the trademark handlebar mustache of Schurrbart...oh no say it ain`t so.

Nebrfarmr
Veteran Advisor

Re: Try again Neb

So, I listed 4 or 5 possible Felonies committed by the MM employee, and the best arguments you can come up with are

1) it wasn't illegal for MM to give the guy money to buy the gun - maybe and maybe not, depending on how they did the transaction.

2) since he wasn't a 'resident' of DC, he wasn't bound by their gun laws (which I thought was such a stretch, that it could not possibly be true, to I looked it up)

 

Heck, I'll give you #1, and we can just assume they bought the gun in a legal matter, but here is what DC gun laws say about #2 (and this is the law AFTER the gun ban was overturned, this guy carried the gun, at a time when essentially any private handgun was banned).

 

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oGdVqtFg1Rj2IABYBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE0bHI0amVzBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2x...

 

(the link brings up a PDF file, that I couldn't cut/paste to, so I jotted down some revelant points from it.

 

Unless you are a 'government' employee with authority to possess a gun, it is illegal to posess a gun in DC unless you are a resident with a registered weapon, with the proper permit to carry that weapon.

 

DC does not allow the 'carry' of any kind of firearm in public, concealed or otherwise, by a private citizen.  You can only get a permit to 'transport' it from your home, to your business, or to a shooting range, and then there are restrictions.

 

When 'transporting' a handgun, it must be unloaded, and in a compartment (like the trunk) where it is not readily accessable by anyone in the car.

If not in a separate compartment, it must be unloaded, and locked in a separate container (glovebox doesn't count) away from the ammunition.

 

 

Again, I find it funny, that if someone like me or 3020 says we want to own a gun, we are besieged by posts telling us all the reasons we should not have one, from the 'dangers' of ownership, to comments that they should be outright taken from us.

However, post a link, to what was almost certainly illegal gun possession by a prominent liberal, or one of his lackeys, and there is excuse after excuse, why it was 'no big deal', and not one iota of interest in having the matter investigated. 

 

Why is that?

Nebrfarmr
Veteran Advisor

Re: Are you sure?

I'm more trying to demonstrate, just how far a Liberal will go, in justifying another Liberal, breaking a law, that Liberals say needs not only to be enforced, but expanded upon.

 

In that, I thought I was doing pretty good.

man of steel
Senior Contributor

Yep!!! I know

In reality, I hope you never give upSmiley Tongue

man of steel
Senior Contributor

I don't know

And I don't really care if it is him or not. He's an idiot and from reading snooky, well.............

 

What I find ironic(not really), is the bashing of "gun nuts" doesn't extend to those such as 'bart

Snooky1953
Senior Contributor

Re: Are you sure?

I believe I wrote, "Now, if I carry it on my person in public, I have committed a felony."  You don't think they make those millions of tourist, some of I'm sure have a gun in their luggage, register them when they hit the city limits, do you?  If they carried them around town, then they are guilty of carrying a concealed weapon without a permit.  But what difference does it really make.  They screwed up.  

r3020
Senior Advisor

Re: Are you sure?


@Snooky1953 wrote:

I believe I wrote, "Now, if I carry it on my person in public, I have committed a felony."  You don't think they make those millions of tourist, some of I'm sure have a gun in their luggage, register them when they hit the city limits, do you?  If they carried them around town, then they are guilty of carrying a concealed weapon without a permit.  But what difference does it really make.  They screwed up.  


Stupid peasants.