Advertisement

The DC Court of Appeals recently removed an unconstitutional limit on concealed-carry permits. As a result, new applications from law-abiding citizens have flooded in.

The DC Court of Appeals recently removed an unconstitutional limit on concealed-carry permits. As a result, new applications from law-abiding citizens have flooded in.

It took a federal appeals court to say so, but it turns out the Constitution applies in the nation’s capital, too.

Law abiding gun-owners are rejoicing in the form of a massive surge in the number of concealed-carry license applications submitted to the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department (MPD).

It took the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to tell the Metropolitan Police Department that the Constitution applies to DC citizens, too.

It took the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to tell the Metropolitan Police Department that the Constitution applies to DC citizens, too.

Advertisement

Under the old, unconstitutional law—known as the “good reason” law—applicants for a concealed-carry license in D.C. had to show a “good reason to fear injury to [their] person or property” or “any other proper reason” as a basis for carrying a handgun. This requirement was subject to the determination of the MPD police chief.

So few people convinced the MPD to allow them their Constitutional right that the MPD only ran ONE concealed-carry application through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System in October 2016, and another ONE in November 2016.

Conversely, now that the “good reason” law has been properly disposed of, there were 145 application-based checks processed in October 2017.

Apart from violating citizens’ civil right to bear arms, one of the most troublesome aspects of the old “good reason” law was HOW an applicant showed “good reason.” D.C. really preferred a person to have already been a victim of an attack before it would “allow” the citizen to exercise her Constitutional right. Of course, by that time it would often be too late.

Advertisement

If a citizen had already been a victim of a crime, the Police Chief could factor that in to whether the citizen had a “good reason” to carry a firearm for protection.

If a citizen had already been a victim of a crime, the Police Chief could factor that in to whether the citizen had a “good reason” to carry a firearm for protection.

The Instructions for Submitting an Application for a Concealed Carry Pistol License state the standards for “good reason”:

“Standards for ‘good reasons to fear injury to person or property’… includes ‘showing a special need for self-protection distinguishable from the general community as supported by evidence of specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicant’s life.’” The MPD stated living or working in “a high crime area by itself does not establish good cause.”

Consider: In the very capital of our nation, what should be the cradle of liberty, the government was picking and choosing when and to whom the Constitution applied. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said ‘No way!’

Advertisement

The Court stated in its ruling: “The individual right to carry common firearms beyond the home for self-defense—even in densely populated areas, even for those lacking special self-defense needs—falls within the core of the Second Amendment’s protections.”

In the case, D.C. claimed that the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms should not apply because D.C. is filled with “critical official and symbolic buildings, monuments, and events, and high-profile public officials” and its “dense urban setting.” D.C. claimed that law abiding citizens carrying guns—even when issued a permit for “good reason”—increases “the likelihood of public harm.”

The Washington Post stated that prior to the ruling, the MPD denied approximately 80% of concealed-carry applicants based on the “good reason” requirement alone.

D.C.’s gun laws have historically been some of the most oppressive in the nation, and the restrictions the courts have thrown out sound like something from a dystopian novel: in addition to the “good reason” restriction, only two years ago the Appeals Court said D.C.’s one-gun-per-month law was unconstitutional, and the Court tossed out requirements that gun owners re-register weapons every three years.

The Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms. The MPD’s “good reason” restriction trampled on that right, said the Court of Appeals.

The Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms. The MPD’s “good reason” restriction trampled on that right, said the Court of Appeals.

Advertisement

Sadly, despite the most recent victory for citizens, D.C. still has some unduly burdensome requirements on the concealed-carry application: A permit fee of $75 ($110 if the applicant’s fingerprints are not already on record with the MPD); “at least 16 hours of training” from an MPD-certified firearms training instructor, and “at least” two hours of range training and shooting on the prescribed qualification course. Also, D.C. does not offer handgun permit reciprocity with any other jurisdiction in the United States.

Meanwhile, Leftists threaten to riot if states try to require people to show a picture ID to vote.

Liberals are shocked and scared that people are exercising their right to bear arms. They hold the Second Amendment as an absurd, archaic holdover from a time when 18th century farmers were too stupid to dial 9-1-1 on their cell phones.

The MPD Street Safety Tip Sheet advises people to “never carry a firearm, knife, or other illegal weapon. A weapon will definitely escalate the situation, and it could ultimately be used to harm innocent people or yourself.”

Even in an age when Liberals ridiculously claim that the President has it out for them, they fail to comprehend the true intent of the Second Amendment—to maintain freedom in the event our own government becomes tyrannical.

Thankfully for the rest of us, including the citizens of D.C., the Constitution continues to frustrate Liberals.