Victory! DC Abandons Appeal to Stop Second Amendment

Giving up court case to stop Second Amendment, DC will acknowledge that residents can possess handguns outside their homes.

Of course the trick here is that they will develop regulations for concealed carry that may be way too burdensome.

The Washington Times reports, “D.C. gives up on ban on carrying guns in public.”

Washington, D.C., will drop its appeal of a federal court ruling that overturned the city’s ban on carrying handguns in public, Attorney General Karl Racine announced Wednesday.

City attorneys will instead focus on defending concealed-carry laws adopted by legislators in the months after U.S. District Court Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. declared the ban was unconstitutional.

“We need to focus our energies not on litigating old laws, but defending new ones that our leaders enacted in good faith to comply with court rulings while still protecting public safety,” Mr. Racine said.

Up until Judge Scullin’s ruling in July, D.C. residents could only legally posses registered firearms in their homes. The Palmer v. District of Columbia ruling led lawmakers to approve a permitting scheme that would allow gun owners to apply for concealed carry licenses.

I think we need to regard this as a clear win and be encouraged by it. It is true that the strategy of the DC government is probably to simply find another way to restrict gun possession.

But gun owners have criticized the permitting scheme as too restrictive, citing the fact that the Metropolitan Police Department requires proof of a “good reason” why a gun owner would need to carry a firearm for protection.

The Attorney General’s office is already defending two challenges to the permitting scheme in court.

Thus we can surmise that the city’s resources were being stretched too thin. It wasn’t easy to argue all the different court cases. So the AG’s office had to make a decision.

The fact remains they are still being beaten back from their original position.

That is good news!

[NOTE: Not only did I have a brain cramp and write “First Amendment” in the headline and subhead, but I and another person missed it in proofreading! Horribly embarrassed. Sorry for the lapse.]