Fed appeals court ruled new dc CC law is unconstitutional

[The Profit Joseph Sith]

Just heard it on the boob tube.. hopefully it's true. Anyone getting tired of winning yet? Anyone?

New law from 2014 would have required anyone to have threats of harm or need for duty use as a requirement for obtaining permit.

[grayfox]

Amazingly under-reported in the MSM! But yes, in a 2-1 vote. Of course DC could request the entire appeals court to hear it (en-banc) but the rebuke in the write-up was pretty thorough! Any setup that says it's to regulate but winds up as an out and out prohibition is unconstitutional on its face, according to the judges. CTD Blog has an article on it:

[INDENT]" By Dave Dolbee published on July 26, 2017 in Legal, News

Lawmakers and judges in favor of gun control have continually tried to weaken the Second Amendment and deny citizens of their constitutional protections and rights under the Second Amendment by imposing a “good reason” requirement. The Second Amendment was not written with any such condition and was purely a fabrication by forces intent on gutting the Second Amendment. This week, the Court said as much.

The Supreme Court set the record straight in 2008 with its District of Columbia v. Heller decision—or so we thought. At a minimum, the Heller decision clarified that the Second Amendment does apply to individuals. However, lawmakers and gun control lobbies have skirted this ruling not by completely refusing a citizen the right to self-defense, but by forcing them to prove they have a “good reason.” Of course, the “good reason” requirement was merely a subversion of the law that allowed anti-gunners to deny people their protections guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

That is until now.

This week, the Second Amendment Foundation won a precedent-setting victory against “good reason” requirements for concealed carry in our Nation’s capital when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a permanent injunction against enforcement of such a requirement in Washington, D.C.

The 2-1 ruling was written by Judge Thomas Beall Griffith. Judge Griffith is a George W. Bush appointee, so he has been on the bench for over a decade. In Griffith’s writing of the decision he stated:

“At the Second Amendment’s core lies the right of responsible citizens to carry firearms for personal self-defense beyond the home, subject to longstanding restrictions… The District’s good-reason law is necessarily a total ban on exercises of that constitutional right for most D.C. residents. That’s enough to sink this law under (the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller ruling).”[/INDENT]

[mdram]

its bound for the supreme court
maryland and other places have the same requirements