The Second Amendment does not allow an infringement on the right to bear arms on the basis of “wise policy.”
The Washington Post reports, “Federal judge again rules key part of new D.C. gun law unconstitutional.”
Ten months after striking down the District’s long-standing ban on carrying firearms in public as unconstitutional, a federal judge Monday ordered the city to halt enforcing a key provision of the new gun-permitting system it adapted in response.
As passed by the D.C. Council, the District’s new carry legislation remains among the strictest in the nation, requiring applicants to state good reason to carry a weapon in order to obtain a permit from police, matching laws in Maryland, New Jersey and New York.
However, in a 23-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. ruled that condition — known as the “good reason/proper reason” requirement — still “impinges on Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment right to bear arms,” because it fails to target dangerous people or specifically how or where individuals carry weapons.
The ruling, issued late in the day, runs counter to some federal appellate rulings and guts a law drafted by D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D) with mayoral and police officials that allows city residents who own properly registered handguns, as well as nonresidents with a state carry license, to apply for a permit to bear a concealed weapon in the District.
Gosh, it’s nice when judges actually do their job.
Methinks we should hire this judge to head on over to the Supreme Court and give a handful of the justices there remedial lessons on actually reading and applying the Constitution when they make their rulings, rather than pulling stuff out of thin air and imposing their personal biases and ideology on the nation.
“The issue here is not whether the . . . requirement is a reasonable or wise policy choice. Rather, the issue is whether this requirement, no matter how well intended, violates the Second Amendment,” –U.S. District Judge, Frederick J. Scullin, Jr.