H.R. 1399, also known as the District of Columbia Personal Protection Act, has passed in the House by a comfortable 266-152 margin. 85 votes came from Democrats. I’d like to thank Georgia Representatives Sanford D. Bishop and Jim Marshall, both Democrats for sponsoring the Act, as well as my own Representatives Phil Gingrey and Tom Price.
The Act rolls back a number of onerous provisions in the District’s half-baked attempt to weasel its way out of complying with the Heller ruling. It seeks to eliminate the registration of firearms, remove restrictions on types of ammunition, legalize semiautomatic handguns and rifles, and it strikes any requirement that firearms be stored unloaded or disassembled.
The Act would also allow civilians to transport firearms within the District in accordance with 18 USC Sec. 926A.
Basically, the only restrictions left in place would be those dictated by Federal law, such as restrictions on short-barreled shotguns and fully automatic weapons.
Dianne Feinstein (one of the priveleged few to hold a carry permit in San Francisco) called the Act, “the height of folly,” which means it’s definitely a good thing. Brady Campaign mouthpiece Paul Helmke is also pulling his hair out over it:
Here are the simple facts: Any Member of Congress truly concerned with D.C.’s compliance with the Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller could have voted for a perfectly suitable option introduced by Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman (CA) and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.).
The “prefectly suitable option” was a fluff piece called H.R. 6842, an empty proclamation disguised as appeasment, which reads in part:
To require the District of Columbia to revise its laws regarding the use and possession of firearms as necessary to comply with the requirements of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, in a manner that protects the security interests of the Federal government and the people who work in, reside in, or visit the District of Columbia and does not undermine the efforts of law enforcement, homeland security, and military officials to protect the Nation’s capital from crime and terrorism.
Of course, this is the kind of condescension I’ve come to expect from these types. The only resolution in H.R. 6842 is a promise to revise the District’s laws to comply with the Heller decision within six months’ time, so long as said revisions don’t make any waves. It follows this up with vague warnings of Presidential assassination and possible terrorism, but does not say what, if anything, those revisions might be when they come.
Sorry gang, but if it comes down to a conflict between civil rights and “security interests,” civil rights win. The District failed to comply with a ruling from the nation’s highest court, and now it’s getting sideswiped by the 14th Amendment.
I’ve wondered before what Fenty was thinking in allowing this whole matter to get to the Supreme Court in the first place, and I’m still wondering why he’s in this fight. After all, if H.R. 1399 passes into law, firearms laws in the District will end up being less restrictive than New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland, Hawaii or New York.
And Mayor Fenty have the honor of allowing yet another 2nd Amendment precedent to take place. I hope he sees the irony; I certainly do.
And it’s quite tasty, even at room temperature.