Some light in DC,,, maybe

[skeets]

For the second time in as many years, a federal judge in Washington ordered the city to halt enforcement of its new, concealed-carry law, requiring applicants to state “good reason” to carry a weapon in order to obtain a permit from police.

The preliminary injunction was contained in a 46-page ruling Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon that will be in force pending further litigation. Leon declared the District’s gun-permitting system is likely unconstitutional. The system was adapted by the District after its long-standing ban on carrying firearms in public was overturned at court order in 2014.

In 2014, Judge Frederick Scullin of the New York District Court ruled in Palmer v. DC that the city’s outright ban of carrying firearms outside of the home was unconstitutional. The city’s current concealed carry law subsequently went into effect on October 22, 2014. However, it’s still near impossible for lawful gun owners to obtain a permit:

[T]here were still stringent standards that many would view as unconstitutional, especially the “good reason” provision, wherein the applicant must tell the city why they must have a carry permit. The city could arbitrarily reject them, as D.C. has a “may issue” carry law. To give some clarity on how absurd may issue carry states operate, just look at Fox Business’ John Stossel’s odyssey to obtain a carry permit in New York. It took him eight and a half months, and a $430 processing fee, for his application process to end with a letter of rejection from the New York City Police Department.

Hopefully this injunction is a meaningful step forward for the Second Amendment in D.C.

- See more at: http://americanlibertypac.com/2016/...LPACNEWOPENSWIRVEEPPICK1#sthash.BlCXF327.dpuf

 

[Diydave]

News won't be worth a hoot, if shrillery gets to make the next appointment to the supremes...

 

[CaveCreekRay]

Here's why...

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Take a hint Big Government -or be thrown out.