A District of Columbia Supreme Court ruling was released yesterday, striking down DC’s ban on handguns. Judge Scullin ruled that the Second Amendment would be upheld and that the current gun ban is unconstitutional, and ruled for the right of residents to carry a gun outside the home for self-defense.
His ruling cited two U.S. Supreme Court cases: a 2008 case that dealt another blow to DC’s handgun ban, and another case in 2012, that included “Chicago’s handgun ban,” according to The Wall Street Journal. Judge Scullin was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, and in his opinion wrote, there isn't a sliver of law for DC to prohibit the public to carry handguns outside their homes.
City officials said Sunday they would like to take the time to look over the ruling, and have not ruled out an appeal. After the 2008 Supreme Court ruling, the city updated their rules allowing guns in public after gun owners took safety courses, agreed to re-register their guns every three years, and be photographed and fingerprinted.
The current DC handgun ruling allows citizens to carry a gun, legally, as long as they are within the borders of the district.
It was also reported “earlier this month, Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky,” succeeded at placing an amendment to stop the District from spending funds that help police “enforce local gun laws.” Massie believes his attempt will likely not make it through the Senate.
Apparently Massie isn’t the only one targeting gun laws. Today, the NRA stated they will be aiming for the election process to get their lobbying goals met -- to elect anyone who would help them “repeal Senate Bill 1160,” the legislation that happened just after the horrific mass murder of innocent children and teachers that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
Yesterday, the NRA also cited that the “11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal in Atlanta upheld Florida’s law to stop doctors from asking parents and children about gun ownership.” Basically reaffirming that doctors do not need to track and record if a patient owns a gun, if it’s not necessary to their care. However, most doctors and nurses have a code of ethics to uphold, if the patients health is at risk due to a gun, or gun violence then it must be recorded and reported to the proper authorities. But this case ruling did find that “unnecessary record-keeping regarding firearms,” should not be part of the patients' care.
Do you think the DC handgun ruling will or should be appealed?