• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

D.C granted 90 day stay (until October 22nd) on Palmer vs. DC ruling

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
D.C. granted 90 day stay (until October 22nd) on Palmer vs. DC ruling

A federal judge on Tuesday put on hold his decision invalidating the District’s long-standing ban on carrying handguns in public places.

The judge’s stay, in effect for 90 days, gives city officials and D.C. police officers some breathing room to respond to a ruling that overturned the District’s primary gun-control law.

Doxie McCoy, a spokeswoman for D.C. Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D), said the stay “gives us time to pause, and to act.” She said the mayor will continue to work with the D.C. Council “in terms of what legislation we need to put in. This is certainly welcome news.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...6383f2-1738-11e4-9349-84d4a85be981_story.html
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
They had 5 years to craft legislation, but insted they put their heads in the sand. :banghead:

Agree! I am shocked the judge gave them a stay, and that SAF did not fight it. Well OC was short lived in DC they will never see it again, and it will be very difficult to get a license in DC. The requirements for just owning a firearm in DC are already stiffer than some states for concealed permit.

They will draft a very constraining ordinance knowing full well that it will take years to get back to the courts. And by then the Hillary administration will have had a chance to restructure the courts.

This was a chance, a slim one for us to prove that lawful unregistered carry is safe and beneficial.
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
SNIP...
This was a chance, a slim one for us to prove that lawful unregistered carry is safe and beneficial.

Yea, that's the very last thing D.C. wants.

The very thought that "blood won't run in the streets" while people carry peaceably around the district makes them piss their pants. That's one test case that the antis don't ever want to see the light of day.
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
Well,,,

Agree! I am shocked the judge gave them a stay, and that SAF did not fight it. Well OC was short lived in DC they will never see it again, and it will be very difficult to get a license in DC. The requirements for just owning a firearm in DC are already stiffer than some states for concealed permit.

They will draft a very constraining ordinance knowing full well that it will take years to get back to the courts. And by then the Hillary administration will have had a chance to restructure the courts.

This was a chance, a slim one for us to prove that lawful unregistered carry is safe and beneficial.

One of the petitioners and the two Alans,,,"the Winners!", actually Proposed a 90 day Stay to the court!!!
Soooo it not hard to believe that the district asked for the stay, or for the court to grant it!

We will never know if the court would have granted a stay if the winners had objected.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
One of the petitioners and the two Alans,,,"the Winners!", actually Proposed a 90 day Stay to the court!!!
Soooo it not hard to believe that the district asked for the stay, or for the court to grant it!

We will never know if the court would have granted a stay if the winners had objected.



The way the 90 day order is written is actually a very good order for gun owners.

Those that would suppress our civil rights were always going to get some sort of stay either from Scullin or from the Circuit Court. 90 days (instead of 180 days) and only for writing constitutional laws is a good thing. Not giving DC grounds to appeal the stay at this time is another good thing.

Remember this order is not a general stay, but a stay so that the district may draft constitutional law if they so choose. The district has 45 days to appeal the ruling. If DC appeals the ruling, the stay goes away. So the district has until September 9 to appeal the ruling. If they do appeal, the DC Council will not be in session until 15 September. So it would appear that in order to appeal, the district would have another period under which constitutional carry would apply.

Gura is smart. He is playing to win. Appearing reasonable and not backing the decider into a corner is good when dealing with a single district court judge. It also sets a tone for the length of stays in the future - 90 days instead of 180 days.
 

ccwinstructor

Centurion
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
919
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
Yes, I think Gura foxed 'em on this. He is playing a deep game

Gura is smart. He is playing to win. Appearing reasonable and not backing the decider into a corner is good when dealing with a single district court judge. It also sets a tone for the length of stays in the future - 90 days instead of 180 days.

I was against a stay at first, but I see how Gura finessed it. Instead of the appeals court granting a stay of undetermined length pending appeal, Gura managed a 90 day stay for them to craft legistalion, and only 45 days - all of which the council is in recess for - to craft an appeal.

We win they lose...

We need to be ready with picnic plans if they choose to appeal in 45 days.
 

44Brent

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
772
Location
Olympia, WA
90 days will be just long enough for D.C. to write a law that is just like what Illinois produce in a similar situation: a law that allows people to get licenses, but has so many places off-limits, that it is effectively provides a license to carry NO WHERE.
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
90 days will be just long enough for D.C. to write a law that is just like what Illinois produce in a similar situation: a law that allows people to get licenses, but has so many places off-limits, that it is effectively provides a license to carry NO WHERE.

Does "within 1000 feet of any government building" sound about right for what D.C. will try and pull? :rolleyes:
 

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Gura is smart. He is playing to win. Appearing reasonable and not backing the decider into a corner is good when dealing with a single district court judge. It also sets a tone for the length of stays in the future - 90 days instead of 180 days.

I was against a stay at first, but I see how Gura finessed it. Instead of the appeals court granting a stay of undetermined length pending appeal, Gura managed a 90 day stay for them to craft legistalion, and only 45 days - all of which the council is in recess for - to craft an appeal.

We win they lose...

We need to be ready with picnic plans if they choose to appeal in 45 days.
Yes, but more likely than not if they appeal wouldn't the court they appeal to grant a continuance of the stay?
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Let's see~~it will be legal to carry in your home with a permit as well as registration. Yea this went down the poop hole fast, there is no way the DC council will not go for broke, just like Illinios did.

If the people had the time of the stay to OC before a ordinance could be written OC could have become embedded to the public and the courts that it is safe, and makes sense. I am stunned that Alan did not fight this stay, this smells of the NRA meddling.
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Judge: Mr. Gura, ya gots any beef with me granting a stay?
Gura (shudda said): Uh, yeah judge, I gots a beef wiff da stay, DC has been stayin since Heller, generally speaking, and specifically since 2009...DC has stayed enough, no stay for DC!!
 

swinokur

Activist Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
917
Location
Montgomery County, MD
DC has 90 days to write legislation, but only 30 days from the date or the order, to file a notice of appeal to the Circuit. My uneducated guess is if that happens, Sculin will cancel his stay, the ruling will be reinstated. and DC will ask the Appeals court for a stay while the appeal goes through the system.

IANAL
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
i thought any "license scheme" that DC comes up with has to pass the constitutional muster this judge set forth? which described "bear" as being concealed or unconcealed. and off limits places as inside government buildings or schools.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
i thought any "license scheme" that DC comes up with has to pass the constitutional muster this judge set forth? which described "bear" as being concealed or unconcealed. and off limits places as inside government buildings or schools.

Correct and good point. This keeps getting lost in the sauce though.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

swinokur

Activist Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
917
Location
Montgomery County, MD
Gura filed opposition to granting of the stay. Can't attach the all pdf's because 1 file is too big. 3 of 4 attached. Main is the actual motion to oppose. others are ancilliary documents

interesting quotes from Chief Lanier in it

Indeed, Defendant Lanier has offered that the Court’s decision “would have a relatively
minimal impact on street crime or her department’s ability to police neighborhoods and lock up
dangerous criminals who are found carrying guns. ‘Law-abiding citizens that register firearms, that
follow the rules, are not our worry.’” Defendant Lanier’s concern appears to remain 5 the security of
sensitive places. “My one focus, really, now is going to be security of our dignitaries in those really
highly sensitive large events.” Id.

Moreover,

Lanier . . . said fears were overstated that the end of the carry ban would impede everyday
policing by putting thousands of additional guns on the street. Lanier also played down
concerns that dangerous criminals could go free if officers cannot detain and charge them for
carrying a weapon in public. Criminals, she said, typically do not possess properly registered
firearms, meaning they can be charged under other laws not challenged by Scullin’s ruling.​
Id. Responding to a statement that D.C. police might require changing their “mindset” to
accommodate legal civilian gun-carrying (thereby aligning their “mindset” with those of police
throughout the United States),

Lanier said Wednesday that is “not a big shift” . . . “We deal with concealed carry every
single day in this city, I don’t care what anybody tells you,” she said, citing the large number
of plainclothes local and federal law enforcement officers. “Legal guns, legally carried,
there’s hundreds of them out there in this city every single day . . . . That’s not a big training
gap for us.”​


I think she should have kept her mouth closed.
 
Last edited:

Toymaker

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2006
Messages
175
Location
Washington, DC USA
"I think she should have kept her mouth closed."


I disagree, swinokur.

She was honest which is rare for a politician or a political appointee. I've seen Lanier at work on other issues and she always leans toward the side of professionalism. She's severely handcuffed (pun intended) by her political leaders and that's what makes her appear biased.
 
Top