It’d be a full time job
Correcting the Washington Post and anti-gunners (but I repeat myself) on HR 6691:
Note that there’s nothing in that statement regarding the carrying of firearms (either concealed or openly) in public. Also, remember when I said HR 6691 changes specific sections of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975? Well, D.C. law regarding concealed and open carrying of firearms is not contained within that act (sec. 7-2501.01(10), D.C. Official Code). It’s contained in 22-4504, which deals with criminal law.
Update: And:
In short, they are freaking out because the laws in Washington D.C. will be substantially identical to most of the 50 states, with the exception that carrying a loaded firearm on your person will still be unlawful.
Well, can’t have DC thinking they have as many rights as states, can we?
September 9th, 2008 at 9:44 am
I still think the best solution to many of the problems with DC would be solved by making it part of Maryland. As bad as Maryland is, it still has better gun laws than DC. Also, I would never have to see another “Taxation Without Representation” license plate or hear another person from DC cry about not having a vote in the Senate. Granted, I’d also no longer be able to piss them off by saying “If it bothers you that much, move to MD or VA and commute.”
September 9th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Washington D.C. should be resized:
From wikipedia:
The Organic Act of 1801 officially organized the District of Columbia and placed the entire federal territory, including the cities of Alexandria, Georgetown, and Washington under the exclusive control of Congress. Further, the unincorporated territory within the District was organized into two counties: the County of Washington on the north bank of the Potomac, and the County of Alexandria on the south bank.[10] Following this Act, citizens located in the District were no longer considered residents of Maryland or Virginia, thus ending their representation in Congress.
How about we do what the Constitution says in Article 1 and make the District no more than ten square miles (…District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States…)
Washington, D.C. — Area – Land: 61.4 SQ MI (159.0 km2)
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.
Well shit, I should know better than to expect the federal government to be bound by the Constitution.
September 9th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
a nit, 10 miles square is actually 100 sq.mi. A big difference in size. 10 sq,mi. would 2×5 or 3 1/3 x3 or 4×2 1/2, etc.
September 10th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Another nit.
10 miles square is not the same as 10 miles squared. One would be 10 square miles, the other would be 100 square miles.