District of Columbia Personal Protection Act

[Kennedy 0]

Well, it's not likely to go anywhere, but it's nice to see congress working on some legislation that will actually bring just a little bit of liberty back to the people.

H.R. 3191 will come up for a vote some time in the next week or two.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.3193:
***A BILL
To restore second amendment rights in the District of Columbia.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `District of Columbia Personal Protection Act'.

SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

(2) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the rights of individuals, including those who are not members of a militia or engaged in military service or training, to keep and bear arms.

(3) The law-abiding citizens of the District of Columbia are deprived by local laws of handguns, rifles, and shotguns that are commonly kept by law-abiding persons throughout the rest of the United States for sporting use and for lawful defense of persons, homes, and families.

(4) The District of Columbia has the highest per capita murder rate in the Nation, which may be attributed in part to local laws prohibiting possession of firearms by law-abiding persons who would otherwise be able to defend themselves and their loved ones in their own homes and businesses.

(5) The Federal Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended by the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986, and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, provide comprehensive Federal regulations applicable in the District of Columbia as elsewhere. In addition, existing District of Columbia criminal laws punish possession and illegal use of firearms by violent criminals and felons. Consequently, there is no need for local laws which only disarm law-abiding citizens.

(6) Legislation is required to correct the District of Columbia's law in order to restore the rights of its citizens under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and thereby enhance public safety.

SEC. 3. REFORM D.C. COUNCIL'S AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT FIREARMS.

Section 4 of the Act entitled `An Act to prohibit the killing of wild birds and wild animals in the District of Columbia', approved June 30, 1906 (34 Stat. 809; sec. 1-303.43, D.C. Official Code) is amended by adding at the end the following: `This section shall not be construed to permit the Council, the Mayor, or any governmental or regulatory authority of the District of Columbia to prohibit, constructively prohibit, or unduly burden the ability of persons otherwise permitted to possess firearms under Federal law from acquiring, possessing in their homes or businesses, or using for sporting, self-protection or other lawful purposes, any firearm neither prohibited by Federal law nor regulated by the National Firearms Act. The District of Columbia shall not have authority to enact laws or regulations that discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms.'.

SEC. 4. REPEAL D.C. SEMIAUTOMATIC BAN.

Section 101(10) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2501.01(10), D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows:

`(10) Machine gun means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger.'.

SEC. 5. REPEAL REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT.

(a) IN GENERAL- Section 201(a) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2502.01(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `any firearm, unless' and all that follows through paragraph (3) and inserting the following: `any firearm described in subsection (c).'.

(b) DESCRIPTION OF FIREARMS REMAINING ILLEGAL- Section 201 of such Act (sec. 7-2502.01, D.C. Official Code) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`(c) A firearm described in this subsection is any of the following:

`(1) A sawed-off shotgun.

`(2) A machine gun.

`(3) A short-barreled rifle.'.

SEC. 6. REPEAL HANDGUN AMMUNITION BAN.

Section 601 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2506.01, D.C. Official Code) is repealed.

SEC. 7. RESTORE RIGHT OF SELF DEFENSE IN THE HOME.

Section 702 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2507.02, D.C. Official Code) is repealed.

SEC. 8. ADDITIONAL REPEALS.

Sections 202 through 211 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (secs. 7-2502.02 through 7-2502.11, D.C. Official Code) are repealed.

SEC. 9. REMOVE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR POSSESSION OF UNREGISTERED FIREARMS.

(a) IN GENERAL- Section 706 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2507.06, D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(1) by striking `that:' and all that follows through `(1) A' and inserting `that a'; and

(2) by striking paragraph (2).

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to violations occurring after the 60-day period which begins on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 10. REMOVE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR CARRYING A PISTOL IN ONE'S DWELLING OR OTHER PREMISES.

(a) IN GENERAL- Section 4(a) of the Act of July 8, 1932 (47 Stat. 651; sec. 22-4504(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(1) in the matter before paragraph (1), by inserting `, except in his dwelling house or place of business or on other land possessed by that person, whether loaded or unloaded,' before `a pistol'; and

(2) by striking `except that:' and all that follows through `(2) If the violation' and inserting `except that if the violation'.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to violations occurring after the 60-day period which begins on the date of the enactment of this Act.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

Oh this was too rich to pass up.

One anti-gun website wrote this about HR 3193:

Quote

Keep Our Nation's Capital Safe.
Tell your Members of Congress to vote NO on S. 1414/HR 3193

Keep it safe? KEEP IT SAFE?!? Doesn't a place have to be safe before you can tell someone to keep it that way?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[lawrocket 3]

The site also said this:

Quote

These local ordinances enacted by the residents of DC over 25 years ago have helped to prevent gun violence in our Nation's Capital

How do they tout th effectiveness of the gun ban in DC?

Quote

The effectiveness of the District’s current ban on handgun possession is demonstrated by the fact that virtually none of the guns used in crime in the District originated here... In contrast, 59 percent of traceable D.C. crime guns were first purchased in Virginia and Maryland. Another 18 percent of D.C. crime guns were bought from gun dealers in North Carolina, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. All of these jurisdictions have gun laws far more lenient than the District of Columbia’s.

So, in other words, people bring guns from elsewhere into DC to cause the highest murder rate int he nation. It's not DC's fault, it's the fault of gun-lovers who dominate those states

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

So, in other words, people bring guns from elsewhere into DC to cause the highest murder rate int he nation. It's not DC's fault, it's the fault of gun-lovers who dominate those states

And to add to the ludicrous and illogical nature of the gun-grabber arguments, you must note that they imply that the "loose" gun laws in those other states are responsible for D.C.'s high gun crime rate. Yet the gun crime rates in those "loose" states, aren't even close to matching D.C.'s.

So if the "loose" gun laws are responsible for gun crime, then how come the "loose" states have much lower gun crime rates? According to their logic, it should be just as high, or higher.

Comparison:
D.C. Gun ban. High gun crime.
Other states. No gun bans. Low gun crime.

Conclusion: failure to ban guns causes gun crime! Doh!

The gun-grabbers think that D.C.'s gun laws are a model for the entire nation. And yet D.C. is one of the highest gun crime rates in the nation. We should all hope that they don't spread this "success story" to the rest of us.

[Kennedy 0]

A good article from the Wall Street Journal:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110005678

Quote

Defense Bill
The House moves to restore gun rights in the District of Columbia.

Monday, September 27, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT

WASHINGTON--When I moved here as a student in the early 1980s, I was appalled to learn that the city had passed an almost complete ban on the ownership of firearms, leaving me with no real means to defend my home or property. On Wednesday, the House will vote on a bill to restore to the residents of the District of Columbia the right to defend themselves.

The citywide gun ban is one of the country's strictest, requiring even the few rifles and shotguns that are allowed be disassembled, unloaded and locked up. But because of the district's status as a federal enclave, the Constitution gives Congress the ultimate authority over what laws govern it. Congress usually doesn't countermand laws passed by the district's elected government, but the gun ban not only blatantly defies the Second Amendment but has also proved to be a manifest failure.

Preventing law-abiding people from owning guns in their homes (there is no talk of allowing residents the right to carry concealed handguns) has done nothing to reduce crime, which has skyrocketed in part due to police mismanagement and corruption. In the five years after the ban took effect in 1976, the murder rate rose to 35 per 100,000 people from 27. In fact, in the three decades since the ban took effect, the annual murder rate has only once fallen below what it was in 1976. In 2002 the murder rate hit 46 per 100,000 people. Robbery rates have also risen dramatically.

Washington residents tell me that the police response times to reports of crime are atrocious, and inner-city residents and the elderly are more vulnerable because the bad guys know they will likely be unarmed. Little wonder that last year six local citizens filed a civil suit in federal court seeking to overturn the gun ban.
Shelly Parker has been threatened by drug dealers as a result of her efforts to clean up her neighborhood. She would like to own a gun for self-protection. Another plaintiff is a policeman who is allowed to carry a gun in his duties as a guard at a court building. But the city turned him down when he asked permission to keep a gun in his home. Another plaintiff is a gay man who was assaulted in another city because of his sexual orientation, but was able to scare off his attacker with a handgun.

District officials did reluctantly legalize pepper spray a decade ago, but they have turned a deaf ear to those who point out that district residents in high-crime areas are helpless until the police are able to respond to a call. That's why Rep. Mark Souder, an Indiana Republican, has introduced a bill that would restore the right of law-abiding, mentally competent citizens to own rifles, shotguns and handguns in the district.

Mr. Souder has assembled a diverse group of co-sponsors, including 41 House Democrats. Among supporters of ending the gun ban are Rep. Ciro Rodriguez of Texas, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and Rep. Sanford Bishop of Georgia, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. Another supporter is Carol Moseley Braun, the famously liberal ex-senator from Illinois, who told district residents during her presidential campaign that she supported ending the gun ban because she believes the Constitution guarantees the right to own guns.

Once Mr. Souder's bill has passed the House it will be sent to the Senate; between 48 and 51 Senators either favor it or are leaning in favor of it. No doubt this is one bill liberal senators will filibuster, so it won't become law this year.

The debate over the district's draconian gun ban should provide valuable lessons for other cities that have foolishly tried to fight crime by disarming their citizens. Chicago's gun ban, passed in 1982, has done nothing to curb that city's murder rate even though its police force is well-trained and well-equipped and has a good relationship with neighborhood leaders. Chicago's murder rate was 5.5 times as high as that of five surrounding counties in 1982, when gun control passed. During the next five years the murder rate soared to 12 times as great as in the neighboring counties.

Gun control is bad for public safety, in large part because criminals ignore gun bans that honest people feel compelled to follow. Bob Levy, a scholar at the Cato Institute in Washington, says lifting the Washington gun ban is a moral issue. "Right now, if someone breaks into a poor person's home here, their only choice is to call 911 and pray the police arrive in time," he says. "That's not good enough, and let's hope members of Congress grant the right to bear arms to people who can't afford to live in the safe neighborhoods they go home to at night."

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*