Dick Heller exited a Washington D.C. police station victorious today with his handgun permit. It has been a long time coming. As the first person in D.C. to attempt to register a handgun after the draconian laws of D.C. were declared unconstitutional, Heller's application was rejected on two technicalities. The authorities of Washington D.C. wanted to see the 22 caliber revolver and test fire it. Heller's handguns were stored with a friend in Maryland.
D.C. gun laws haven't improved much. The home defense weapons must have a trigger lock, or be disassembled, they must not fall into the D.C. definition of a semi-automatic weapon, and the home owner is prohibited from using it, even for self defense, unless the application is approved. Even then, the approved weapon can be loaded and used only if the home owner reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger from an attacker in the home.
Doesn't sound like much of a victory. Yet. Challenges are being waged, and creeping incrementalism works both ways.
"I find the Supreme Court decision repugnant. [But] this city was facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal expenses," Evanston Alderman Steve Bernstein said. "We'll be better off getting [the ordinance] off the books. We want to put as many restrictions on as we think will pass the Supreme Court muster. We don't want people to have handguns in Evanston, but right now the law is against us. This was pragmatic. We're being sued. It'd be nice to fight for principle but we don't have the money to fight."
In 1981, Morton Grove Illinois, a northern Chicago suburb, banned the possession of handguns. This evening, the Village of Morton Grove Board of Trustees has voted 5-1 to repeal its ban on the possession of handguns in response to District of Columbia, et al. v. Dick Anthony Heller.
How ironic, when I go to the village's website, that I should find a photo of the minuteman......
Dick Heller and two other plaintiffs have again filed suit against the District of Columbia for violating their rights to keep and bear arms.
The lawsuit states DC's revised gun laws continue to violate individual rights guaranteed in the second amendment, and that the regulations still make it impossible for a home owner to keep a firearm ready for self defense in the home.
In case you have not seen Smith & Wesson's Heller Commemorative revolver, here it is. Click the photo to see a close-up of the laser engraving. I'm not big on Commems, and even less keen on laser engraving, but I like the fact that Smith & Wesson is producing this little carry gun. I suppose it's fitting that their choice would be the S&W 442, one of the finest concealed carry guns available. It's an acknowledgement by Smith & Wesson that they understand the second amendment is about the right to self defense, and not about hunting. God knows Ducks Unlimited has put out enough hunting commemoratives. It's nice to see a gun maker advocating self defense for a change.
The first six revolvers will be presented to the six original plaintiffs in DC vs Heller, Shelly Parker, Tom Palmer, Gillian St. Lawrence, Tracey Ambeau, George Lyon and Dick Heller. A portion of the proceeds will go to the Second Amendment Foundation.
Wilmette`s handgun ban is gone. The village board voted Tuesday night 7-0 to repeal the 19 year old ban, after deciding they would get their asses stomped in litigation over whether they had a right to infringe on the Constitution.
Shoot a few rounds at the range for the citizens in Wilmette.
In spite of being on call this weekend, after I finished with the scheduled cases today, I was able to have a small Hellerbration. While I did not have a Barrett 50 cal, I did try to have a representative sampling of the firearms a citizen would commonly own as a toast to a majority in SCOTUS.
"I happen to believe that this is now going to open the door to litigation against every gun safety law that states have passed – assault weapons bans, trigger locks, and all the rest of it." Senator Dianne Feinstein
It really came as no surprise to most gun advocates. The US Supreme Court. 5 to 4. The Washington DC gun ban struck down. The second amendment solidly defined as an individual right. ¤POOF¤*˜¨¨ The notion of the right to gun ownership being somehow tied to a militia as a collective right to be enjoyed by National Guardsmen was shot full of holes as surely as an IDPA target in front of Rob Leatham.
What the Supreme Court's ruling on District of Columbia, et al. v. Dick Anthony Heller means to gun owners will be up to them. Historically, a biased mainstream media has misinterpreted the second amendment. Gun owners can likewise expect them to misinterpret the meaning of DC v. Heller. Expect them to continue to cling to believing "shall not be infringed" means "walk on me if I do not resist." Even as the Supreme Court's ruling was released, the mainstream media has splashed a video of an anti-gun Presidential candidate's take on the implications of the historic ruling.
"You know, I have said consistently that I believe the second amendment is an individual right, and that was the essential decision that the Supreme Court came down on, and it also recognized that even though we have an individual right to bear arms, that right can be limited by sensible reasonable gun laws," claimed Barack Obama, "The DC law, according to the Supreme Court went too far, and now the key is going to be for us to come together and say people do have an individual right, and there's nothing wrong with common sense gun laws, background checks keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill, and creating what I think is the common sense belief among people that we can uphold our traditions with respect to firearms and prevent the senseless killings that we see on the streets of so many American cities."
Some will say that District of Columbia v. Heller was about Washington DC and the right to own a firearm in the district. Others will say it was about the right to own an assembled firearm in the district. District of Columbia v. Heller was about much more. It has reverberating implications across American society. Expect the Supreme Court's ruling to be painted many different colors, with many different brushes, in the months to come. As politicians are forced to change their platforms, simply to maintain political viability when confronted with the paradox of their unconstitutional stance against the rights of American citizens, their agendas will be exposed. Expect the talking heads of the mainstream media to do the same. Ideas die hard, even wrong ideas. I do not believe that any of them realize just how broad reaching this ruling is. The defining of the meaning of the second amendment, after so many years of debate with those who seek power through oppression, is a reaffirmation of the ideals the United States was founded on. The government is founded for the people, by the people and it serves the will of the people. The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the second amendment to prevent this ideal from becoming twisted, masquerading as "common sense" and being used against the people.
Common sense to one man is often not common sense to another. Indicative of this is the fact that many people cited the now defunct DC gun laws as common sense laws. Senator Obama is on record as advocating the abolition of the right to own handguns, any handguns, to the point of confiscating them from their rightful owners. He is also on record as advocating the repeal of concealed carry legislation that was hard won across the nation on a state level. Nay.....Senator Obama's common sense is not the common sense shared by commoners. His common sense is the same elitist fear of the common man's ability to depose him from his lofty perch that he sneers at the common man from. His "common sense laws" are only a foil to gain what is on his hidden agenda. That hidden agenda is one of power, control and oppression. But Obama is not alone. His agenda is shared by all who seek to strip the common man of his ability to protect himself. Fortunately, the Supreme Court upheld the common man's right to own and carry a firearm not only for self defense, but also so that he might again rise up against an oppressive government and regain the liberty endowed to all men by their creator. That is the ultimate protection, and the greatest fear of the elitist firearms abolitionist.
Xavier is a Registered Nurse who specialized in complex wound care. He has practiced for over fourteen years in his community. He often provided nursing service in areas where law enforcement refused to enter without back-up. Xavier now works in surgery.
Xavier has been an avid shooter for over 30 years. He strongly supports the 2nd Amendment, opposes gun control of any sort, and carries a weapon 24 hours a day.
Xavier is known on various internet gun forums as XavierBreath. He is married with three children, and is moderated by an apathetic one eyed cat, a goofy Golden Retriever, and a stalwart German Shepherd Dog. One day, he hopes to be deserving of them all.
Domari Nolo
Xavier can still be emailed at
treatmewithbenignneglect@gmail.com
He might read your email.
He might delete it on sight.
He might publish it and comment on it.
The Five Rules of Concealed Carry
1. Your concealed handgun is for protection of life only.
2. Know exactly when you can use your gun.
3. If you can run away -- RUN!
4. Display your gun, be prepared to go to jail.
5. Don't let your emotions get the best of you.
As the first person in D.C. to attempt to register a handgun after the draconian laws of D.C. were declared unconstitutional, Heller's application was rejected on two technicalities. The authorities of Washington D.C. wanted to see the 22 caliber revolver and test fire it. Heller's handguns were stored with a friend in Maryland. 
As the first person in D.C. to attempt to register a handgun after the draconian laws of D.C. were declared unconstitutional, Heller's application was rejected on two technicalities. The authorities of Washington D.C. wanted to see the 22 caliber revolver and test fire it. Heller's handguns were stored with a friend in Maryland. 
