HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Tens of Thousands of D.C....

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 07:27 PM

 

Tens of Thousands of D.C. Gun Owners Forced to Re-Register Firearms

WASHINGTON (CBSDC) — Big changes for gun owners in the nation’s capital will impact tens of thousands of law-abiding citizens, many of whom have no idea the change is coming.

The new requirement for gun owners in the District goes into effect next year and failure to comply could mean jail time.

Starting Jan. 1 all registered gun owners in D.C. must re-register their firearms within 90 days. D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier says notices will start going out to gun owners soon.

“Every three years you’ll have to confirm you still live in the District and you still have your firearm.” Lanier tells WNEW.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/12/17/tens-of-thousands-of-d-c-gun-owners-forced-to-re-register-firearms/

9 replies, 1610 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
Reply Tens of Thousands of D.C. Gun Owners Forced to Re-Register Firearms (Original post)
SecularMotion Dec 2013 OP
NYC_SKP Dec 2013 #1
beevul Dec 2013 #2
petronius Dec 2013 #3
sarisataka Dec 2013 #5
petronius Dec 2013 #6
DonP Dec 2013 #7
sarisataka Dec 2013 #8
Eleanors38 Dec 2013 #4
DonP Dec 2013 #9

Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 07:33 PM

1. My two favorite comments from that article:

 

One sensible, the other just plain funny.

amongoose
• 20 hours ago

So basically .....
If they can't make it illegal to own one they will make it too expensive, or by regulation too difficult to do so.
50,000 most in person?
There are 10 stations to register at, if most is 30,000 that's 3000 per station,
33 people per day?
Sounds like a system set up not to just fail. but to make you a criminal and thereby deny you your gun rights legally - well sort of.


PastorBobCeleste
• a day ago

I, as a Born Again Washed in the Blood of the Lamb Christian, do not need one, for God Almighty Himself has commanded that I carry up to two guns, not that my ownership be limited to two weapons but that I carry two at any given time. Therefore Religious liberty, as guaranteed by the US Constitutions, allows me and all who belong to Christ, to observe our sincerely held religious beliefs and carry, concealed or open, with or without a state issued permit.

In Luke 22:35, 36, &38 from the ACP/KJV expanded, we read: “ 35 And Jesus said unto them, “When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing?” And they said, “Nothing.” 36 Then said Jesus unto them, “But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. ... 38 And they (epo) said, “Lord, behold, here are two swords.” And Jesus said unto them (autos), “It is enough.”

The key here are the two Greek words, epo and autos and their translation and why they were translated the way they were. But let me start by saying that a more proper translation of verse 38 is And he (epo) said, “Lord, behold, here are two swords.” And Jesus said unto him (autos), “It is enough.” Why he and him instead of they and them? Well the Greek word, ‘epo’ can be translated as either ‘they’ or ‘he’, it is more often, and in this context more correctly, translated as ‘he’, just as is ‘auto’ is more properly translated ‘him’ but why did the original translators back in the years leading up to the KJV 1611 translate the two words as a group and not as individuals? Simple. King James did not want the common man armed. t was called weapon control. Only the government could have weapons. Jesus commanded that the common Christ-following man be armed.

Now when you translate it correctly you can see that Jesus commands His followers to have up to two swords. That would be the long sword and the shorter sword carried by the troops of both the temple guard and the soldiers of Rome, aka the government(s), which shows us where the founding fathers of our once great, proud, and self sufficient country got the idea for Article Two of the Bill of Rights.

Therefore as a follower of what God said in His Holy Book, the Holy Bible, and not a follower of one who tells us what God really meant to say in His Holy Book the Bible, I, by my very religious beliefs and commitment to follow Christ, am entitled to carry with or without a state issued license, for the very First Article of the Bill of Rights guarantees me that right: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”. As a Born Again Washed in the Blood of the Lamb Christian, I strive to live my daily life as the Lord God Almighty, The Creator of the Universe, Christ Jesus, has dictated in His book, the Holy Bible.

Want me to follow your dictates, your principles, your claims of how I should live? Do two things, first go get crucified for my sake and second come back to life after three days and let me put my hand in the hole in your side and my fingers in the nail holes in your wrist and ankles.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 07:35 PM

2. Registration. No wonder the...

 

Registration. No wonder the gun violence numbers are so low in DC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 09:45 PM

3. Why? I don't see anything in the article that explains why this is a good

or useful idea. Is there a demonstrable public benefit to this re-registration plan?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to petronius (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 20, 2013, 12:07 AM

5. It is listed on the application...

$13 FEE REQUIRED WITH THIS APPLICATION

estimated 50,000 gun owners x $13= $650,000 every three years. Since each application has only space for one firearm, that total is likely much higher.

Strangely this new policy changes the safety training requirement from a 4 hour class to an online video with a quiz. I found the test ridiculously simple but I can now register a firearm if I move to DC. The video showed some techniques I believe to be unsafe and was ambiguous about safe storage. Along with storing in secure containers, one option was to store a firearm where "it would reasonably considered to be unreachable by a minor under 18". That could be considered to be a high shelf; I do not believe that to be safe storage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 20, 2013, 12:36 AM

6. Just a money grab, then? I'd very much like to see a court crack

down on arbitrary make-work financial barriers - NYC actually got theirs upheld a while back, which was disappointing...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to petronius (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 20, 2013, 11:15 AM

7. Heller, still a DC resident, is already suing on this

 

Looks like DC will need all that registration money to pay their court costs again.

This is another Police Chief Cathy Lanier idea, after all she "only" cost DC $3.4 million in legal fees for the SAF and NRA last time. It's not like it's her money anyway and it's for gun control.

Maybe Bloomie will pick up her tab?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to petronius (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 20, 2013, 11:52 AM

8. Perhaps DC should

release statistics on how many crimes their registration has helped solve. One would think they would want to tout the effectiveness of this tool.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 11:35 PM

4. I'm catching a whiff of legal action involving an Old South legal expression:

 

Subterfuge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 20, 2013, 12:00 PM

9. It is pretty damn close to a "Poll Tax" in execution

 

It's an arbitrary fee to exercise what SCOTUS has defined and the President has confirmed is as an individual civil right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread