DC Po Po Gun Search

[I_am_that_girl]

No?

We never thought of that....

See, there is this thing called the constitution that LEO's are sworn to uphold, the problem is, no one cares about the constituion anymore. That is the basis of our whole argument here. "I am that girl"

I am fully aware of the constitution. If you own a gun and have not nor do you intend to do something illegal with it,then why hide it? If I lived in DC,owned a gun and, officers came to check my house out,you better believe I will be standing on my stoop waiting to show them what I have.To me it then becomes a visual understanding. If someone attempts to harm me or invades my home then I have the right to use it. That is what the constitution really means.If I am not a police officer but own a gun and chose to hide it what is my intent? That I have or may use it in a crime.!!! All I am saying is they are not coming to take your guns so unless you have a reason to be worried, why not let them see what you have.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

I will be standing on my stoop waiting to show them what I have.To me it then becomes a visual understanding.

:fixed:

.... face down on the sidewalk, with a Glock in your back .....

 

[Pushrod]

I am fully aware of the constitution. If you own a gun and have not nor do you intend to do something illegal with it,then why hide it? If I lived in DC,owned a gun and, officers came to check my house out,you better believe I will be standing on my stoop waiting to show them what I have.To me it then becomes a visual understanding. If someone attempts to harm me or invades my home then I have the right to use it. That is what the constitution really means.If I am not a police officer but own a gun and chose to hide it what is my intent? That I have or may use it in a crime.!!! All I am saying is they are not coming to take your guns so unless you have a reason to be worried, why not let them see what you have.

Wow, I mean utterly wow! Are you that naive? They may not be coming to take it this time, but how about when they then make a law outlawing the type of gun you have, now they know you have it and a dynamic raid is set up to retrieve it.
Think that can't happen? Look up the 50 caliber and semi-auto rifle bans in California and how they used a prior registry to go to homes with those weapons and confiscate and arrest the owners who didn't turn them in in time.
And, no, what The Constitution really means about the 2nd Amendment is that it restricts the government from infringing on gun owners, period! The Second Amendment is about keeping arms incase the government ever starts acting outside of The Constitution, it allows for citizens (the unorganized militia) to stand up and put the government back in its place by force of arms.
Self-defence and hunting are secondary to that main reason.
Would you open your home up to monthly police inspections to just snoop around and make sure nothing illegal is being done, or to make sure your not hoarding too much food or other items? Why not? You said you have nothing to hide?

 

[AK-74me]

I am fully aware of the constitution. If you own a gun and have not nor do you intend to do something illegal with it,then why hide it? If I lived in DC,owned a gun and, officers came to check my house out,you better believe I will be standing on my stoop waiting to show them what I have.To me it then becomes a visual understanding. If someone attempts to harm me or invades my home then I have the right to use it. That is what the constitution really means.If I am not a police officer but own a gun and chose to hide it what is my intent? That I have or may use it in a crime.!!! All I am saying is they are not coming to take your guns so unless you have a reason to be worried, why not let them see what you have.

It doesn't matter if you have no bad intent, the 4th amendment gives me the right to not have my house searched without PC, sure they can ask and I can say no and that is that. They can't take it any futher.

I guess you don't know about the gun confiscations that occured during Katrina? I mean here these people are in a situation where they need a gun the most and here come the police and other government agents to take the one thing that can provide them security and safety.

Have you heard comments the mayor and D.C.'s Chief of Police have made? They don't want the citizens of D.C. to have guns, period. The hell if I am letting anyone in my house to poke around, even though I have nothing to hide.

 

[AK-74me]

I am that girl.

Maybe you should research what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany, they thought that complying with these kind of things was good too.

Well you saw how that worked out.

 

[Novus Collectus]

...ammunition allowed to be assembled or must it be in components?

Ammunition is allowed to be assembled if possessed by someone with a firearms certificate.......but if you do not have a certificate then you are not allowed to even possess the components. In other words, all those people with an inert cartridge on their keychain, or that uses a brass case for decoration on a bag/backpack, or bullets in some kind of modern art is breaking the law when they are in DC (unless they have a certificate, are a dealer, a cop or passing through without stopping).

Think about all those times you went to the range and when you get home you discover someone's ejected shell landed in your jacket or shirt pocket. Imagine if you went to DC that day without knowing it was in your pocket, you will be an unknowing criminal.
For the dummy cartridge on the keychain which I bought legally in MD, I went to DC with it in my pocket many times without knowing it was illegal at the time. I think DC is the only place in the entire country with such a law dealing with possession of even simple bullets and cases which are seperated and or inert.

 

[Novus Collectus]

is that just a dc thing or all of MD thing? i hope just dc cause i moved here with a decent collection of rifles and shotguns.....

Just DC. Your rifles and shotguns are hunky dory in MD and you do not have to tell the state you have them, register them or anything whatsoever.

 

[Novus Collectus]

.... so unless you have a reason to be worried, why not let them see what you have.

If I know I am not breaking the law, then there is no reason for them to come into my house to and therefore no reason for me to let them come into my house.
As a matter of fact, if I am not breaking the law and they have no reason to think I am, then why should they even ask? As law abiding citizens we should not be treated as suspects because of their whimsy.

 

[I_am_that_girl]

If I know I am not breaking the law, then there is no reason for them to come into my house to and therefore no reason for me to let them come into my house.
As a matter of fact, if I am not breaking the law and they have no reason to think I am, then why should they even ask? As law abiding citizens we should not be treated as suspects because of their whimsy.

You are exactly right.You are not breaking the law so there is no reason for the police to come into your house. The real issue is not that they come to your door and ask if they can search because to that you have the right to say no.When the consitution was written everyone owned guns.You could go anywhere and and it was an unspoken understanding that if you attempted to harm me than I am equipped to defend myself.Times have changed therefore the people who are to blame are the ones who use guns for crimes. Use to be that if you shot someone to protect yourself there were no laws broken. Now guns are being used in ways the constitution never intended.So whether good or bad if you own a gun the government feels they have the right to control it. I am not against your views here. It is quite the opposite actually. But the real issue here is not that police are coming to ask you. The issue is that people have abused our right to have a gun.You are right,all of you who have commented on this topic thus far. But instead of leaning soley on what our rights are we should think of it in an objective manner. Times have changed.As have people from that particular era.No one in my generation made it what it is. It is what it is. Why do I feel like this is not a place to compare thoughts but more of an attack on me when I am really with you all on this. Maybe just misunderstood.

 

[edinsomd]

I suppose I'll just start at the beginning, and try to be gentle. Your heart seems to be in the right place.

You are exactly right.You are not breaking the law so there is no reason for the police to come into your house. The real issue is not that they come to your door and ask if they can search because to that you have the right to say no. When the consitution was written everyone owned guns.
Not so! Slaves and serfs were only allowed to carry firearms under strictly controlled circumstances. Why do you suppose that was?

You could go anywhere and and it was an unspoken understanding that if you attempted to harm me than I am equipped to defend myself. Times have changed therefore the people who are to blame are the ones who use guns for crimes.
The people who are to blame are the ones who deny lawful citizens the right of self-defense.

Use to be that if you shot someone to protect yourself there were no laws broken.
Castle Doctrine Laws are on the books in many states protecting people from criminal prosecution and civil suits when defending their home and families.

Now guns are being used in ways the constitution never intended.
Ya got me scratching my head on this one. The people's protection against tyranny and the freedom to defend one's self and others is exactly what the Second Amendment to the Constitution intended.

So whether good or bad if you own a gun the government feels they have the right to control it.
SCOTUS should clear up this misconception soon. At least I hope so!

I am not against your views here. It is quite the opposite actually. But the real issue here is not that police are coming to ask you. The issue is that people have abused our right to have a gun.
Criminals have been flouting laws as long as laws have been around. Punish them, not the lawful citizen.

You are right,all of you who have commented on this topic thus far. But instead of leaning soley on what our rights are we should think of it in an objective manner. Times have changed.
They certainly have! Drug peddlers and street gangs wage turf wars in the inner city, criminals are free to mug, rape, and murder, honest people live in fear in their own neighborhoods all because the leadership has denied the citizen the right of self-defense.

As have people from that particular era. No one in my generation made it what it is. It is what it is. Why do I feel like this is not a place to compare thoughts but more of an attack on me when I am really with you all on this.
Maybe just misunderstood.
Not an attack on you per se, some of us feel pretty strongly on the issue for any number of reasons. Do some research, the recent SCOTUS hearing concerning the DC gun ban, and the debacle in post-Katrina New Orleans are good places to start.

Happy shooting,
Ed

 

[I_am_that_girl]

I suppose I'll just start at the beginning, and try to be gentle. Your heart seems to be in the right place.

Happy shooting,
Ed

I can't argue the fact that it was written that we have the right to bare arms. It is in black and white. Words that should never be erased. My thoughts are that when the constitution was written it was intended for the purpose to be able to protect yourself,your family and, the things in life that you have rightly acquired.Truth is.... the reason why this is such an issue is because the people who use a gun for the wrong reasons have made it hard on the people who own guns for the right reasons. Do I think the police should be able to come into your home and search for fire arms??? No. I don't believe they should. That is why we have the right to say no. Do I believe the police can obtain a search warrant with reason to believe a gun has been used in a crime???? Yes I do. Our right to own weapons was not intended for us to freely go out and rob an old lady. Steal a car at a traffic light. Blow off someones head for not paying a drug dealer his/her money. Our right to bare arms does not permit us to commit these acts. So those are the people who ruin it for everyone else. I think we should be able to carry a gun that is visible to everyone. Maybe then if someone thinks of robbing me or harming me they will know that it might not turn out in their favor.How many people have been killed or assaulted that may have just been okay if the law allowed them to carry a weapon that an offender could see they had on them?? Criminals have stripped us of that right. Every action causes a reaction and the government is reacting. So where do we start to fix it?? Maybe if you commit a violent crime you never get out of jail. If you sell dope on the street you don't get out on bail. You spend life in prison. The truth is it will never be right until our justice system figures out that even when they put offenders away for life they will still have work. There will always be another case. Police are not against guns. They know how important it is to have one. Problem is that they are the only ones safe cause visually they are identified as not ones to be f__ked with. Why?? Because they have the right to carry a gun and use it if put in a dangerous situation. Don't you know that cops do the dirty work. They clean up the streets and judges put them right back out there. The government should know that gun control is solved by keeping hard core criminals in. How much money do these officers get paid to go door to door? Think of how much money the District could save by just keeping the criminals in.Eventually all that would be left are gun owners who do the right thing.

 

[edinsomd]

I think we should be able to carry a gun that is visible to everyone. Maybe then if someone thinks of robbing me or harming me they will know that it might not turn out in their favor.
How many people have been killed or assaulted that may have just been okay if the law allowed them to carry a weapon that an offender could see they had on them?? Criminals have stripped us of that right. Every action causes a reaction and the government is reacting. So where do we start to fix it?? Maybe if you commit a violent crime you never get out of jail. If you sell dope on the street you don't get out on bail. You spend life in prison. The truth is it will never be right until our justice system figures out that even when they put offenders away for life they will still have work. There will always be another case. Police are not against guns. They know how important it is to have one. Problem is that they are the only ones safe cause visually they are identified as not ones to be f__ked with. Why?? Because they have the right to carry a gun and use it if put in a dangerous situation. Don't you know that cops do the dirty work. They clean up the streets and judges put them right back out there. The government should know that gun control is solved by keeping hard core criminals in. How much money do these officers get paid to go door to door? Think of how much money the District could save by just keeping the criminals in.Eventually all that would be left are gun owners who do the right thing.

Good, but take the next step. What if the criminal couldn't tell who was carrying? Granddad walking home from the grocery store is an easy mark, but what if he has a .38 snubbie in his pocket? The college student going to night class isn't as tempting a target if she might have a 9mm in her fanny pack. If those who are of legal age, pass a background check, and receive proper training carry concealed, the criminals loose. It’s happened in every state that passed such legislation. Also, don't put too much faith in law enforcement. The LEOs do what they can, but they can't be everywhere all the time. At your crime scene, you are the first responder.
Keep 'em in the ten ring,
Ed

 

[I_am_that_girl]

Good, but take the next step. What if the criminal couldn't tell who was carrying? Granddad walking home from the grocery store is an easy mark, but what if he has a .38 snubbie in his pocket? The college student going to night class isn't as tempting a target if she might have a 9mm in her fanny pack. If those who are of legal age, pass a background check, and receive proper training carry concealed, the criminals loose. It’s happened in every state that passed such legislation. Also, don't put too much faith in law enforcement. The LEOs do what they can, but they can't be everywhere all the time. At your crime scene, you are the first responder.
Keep 'em in the ten ring,
Ed

That is my point exactly. Grandpa does not have the option of carrying a gun in plain view. It is in his pocket cause if he has it in plain view and the magazine is in the gun and ready to go if someone attacks him ,he becomes a criminal when the police see him walking down the street with it. That is why we should be able to carry a gun in plain view. Magazine loaded and ready to go. The men who wrote the constitution did it that way. No where in history does it say anywhere that John Hancock or anyone else for that matter felt threatened by someone, jumped off of his horse, ran to his saddle bag, grabbed his magazine and, armed himself properly. Times have changed.The law says now that you can have a gun on the front seat of your car in plain view but it can not be loaded and the magazine can not be within reach. Therefore you must keep it in the trunk. People know this so if a criminal thinks you have a gun he/she knows that as long as they prevent you from getting to your trunk then he/she can get what ever they want from you.This debate is clearly for the people who do the right thing in life.So why are we against each other when the real problem is out there on our streets?It is true that the police can't be everywhere but the fact is they are required to uphold the laws and without them there would be no accountability for the ones who do wrong. The fact also remains that they are our(the innocent ) eyes and ears when it comes to solving crimes committed upon us. Don't under estimate grandpa. He is more than likely on our side on this as opposed to the younger generations who are now being taught that guns are bad. Maybe there should be a law that requires us all to carry a weapon. That seems to be an effective way to detirmine who does right and wrong with them.Survival of the fittest. Right???

 

[edinsomd]

That is my point exactly. Grandpa does not have the option of carrying a gun in plain view. It is in his pocket cause if he has it in plain view and the magazine is in the gun and ready to go if someone attacks him ,he becomes a criminal when the police see him walking down the street with it. That is why we should be able to carry a gun in plain view. Magazine loaded and ready to go. The men who wrote the constitution did it that way. No where in history does it say anywhere that John Hancock or anyone else for that matter felt threatened by someone, jumped off of his horse, ran to his saddle bag, grabbed his magazine and, armed himself properly. Times have changed.The law says now that you can have a gun on the front seat of your car in plain view but it can not be loaded and the magazine can not be within reach. Therefore you must keep it in the trunk. People know this so if a criminal thinks you have a gun he/she knows that as long as they prevent you from getting to your trunk then he/she can get what ever they want from you.This debate is clearly for the people who do the right thing in life.So why are we against each other when the real problem is out there on our streets?It is true that the police can't be everywhere but the fact is they are required to uphold the laws and without them there would be no accountability for the ones who do wrong. The fact also remains that they are our(the innocent ) eyes and ears when it comes to solving crimes committed upon us. Don't under estimate grandpa. He is more than likely on our side on this as opposed to the younger generations who are now being taught that guns are bad. Maybe there should be a law that requires us all to carry a weapon. That seems to be an effective way to detirmine who does right and wrong with them.Survival of the fittest. Right???

OK *takes deep breath* Open carry is illegal in Maryland, has been since the early 1970's. A concealed carry license is pretty much unobtainable here unless you have documented threats against your person, regularly carry large amounts of cash, or are politically connected. So Joe Citizen here can either go unarmed or become a criminal in the eyes of the State for exercising his Second Amendment Rights. Joe Criminal couldn't care less about laws; he carries when and where he chooses. He has a target rich environment, because he's carrying a firearm and the honest citizen cannot. If and when Maryland decides to grant its citizens their rights under the Constitution, some folks will opt to carry a concealed weapon. Not everyone, and even those who apply won't necessarily carry at any given time, but now Joe Criminal can't be sure if his next intended victim is as helpless as before. This is why every state abutting MD with "Shall Issue" laws has a lower crime rate than here.
Front sight is key,
Ed

 

[morningbell]

Knock Knock ...

.... Hello, may I search your house for Illegal Guns ....

I posted the story and such a few days ago but nobody seems to care what I had to say....

I think its a great idea.

 

[morningbell]

I posted the story and such a few days ago but nobody seems to care what I had to say....

I think its a great idea.

I found my old post and it seemed that AK-74me and Buddy Lee cared, thanks for caring guys!

 

[AK-74me]

I found my old post and it seemed that AK-74me and Buddy Lee cared, thanks for caring guys!

You posted the story after this thread already existed. That is why you had no responses.

 

[I_am_that_girl]

OK *takes deep breath* Open carry is illegal in Maryland, has been since the early 1970's. A concealed carry license is pretty much unobtainable here unless you have documented threats against your person, regularly carry large amounts of cash, or are politically connected. So Joe Citizen here can either go unarmed or become a criminal in the eyes of the State for exercising his Second Amendment Rights. Joe Criminal couldn't care less about laws; he carries when and where he chooses. He has a target rich environment, because he's carrying a firearm and the honest citizen cannot. If and when Maryland decides to grant its citizens their rights under the Constitution, some folks will opt to carry a concealed weapon. Not everyone, and even those who apply won't necessarily carry at any given time, but now Joe Criminal can't be sure if his next intended victim is as helpless as before. This is why every state abutting MD with "Shall Issue" laws has a lower crime rate than here.
Front sight is key,
Ed

You know the laws well. I don't want to be precieved as argumentative so pardon my rebuttles.With each response made here another point comes to light. Again you are right!! Some people in special situations can apply for a gun carrying license that allows them to carry a concealed weapon. Someone who carries a lot of cash on a regular basis,for instance.My point to that is why is hers/his life any more important than mine? The government is essentially saying that we want to protect that money you are taking to the bank so we will give you a little security. The person who works serving tables all week that is taking their money to the bank is ASS OUT because that amount of money is just not worth protecting. "We will give you a gun license for being a good little boy or girl but before you get robbed make sure you have practiced a plan on how you will get to the trunk of your car to retrieve your magazine."The person carrying a large sum of money's life is not any more important than yours or mine.The political connection is another thing that makes no sense. If you are a politician you have the right to carry a gun. Politicians want us to believe that they have our best interest in mind(which is a whole other topic). They want us to believe that they are here for us. So why don't they protect us? They are protected. Why can't we be? Seems like you and I are on the same page here.Where are all of the anti-gun activist?? I know this county is full of them? Come out Come out where ever you are.

 

[AK-74me]

You know the laws well. I don't want to be precieved as argumentative so pardon my rebuttles.With each response made here another point comes to light. Again you are right!! Some people in special situations can apply for a gun carrying license that allows them to carry a concealed weapon. Someone who carries a lot of cash on a regular basis,for instance.My point to that is why is hers/his life any more important than mine? The government is essentially saying that we want to protect that money you are taking to the bank so we will give you a little security. The person who works serving tables all week that is taking their money to the bank is ASS OUT because that amount of money is just not worth protecting. "We will give you a gun license for being a good little boy or girl but before you get robbed make sure you have practiced a plan on how you will get to the trunk of your car to retrieve your magazine."The person carrying a large sum of money's life is not any more important than yours or mine.The political connection is another thing that makes no sense. If you are a politician you have the right to carry a gun. Politicians want us to believe that they have our best interest in mind(which is a whole other topic). They want us to believe that they are here for us. So why don't they protect us? They are protected. Why can't we be? Seems like you and I are on the same page here.Where are all of the anti-gun activist?? I know this county is full of them? Come out Come out where ever you are.

Maryland is not a shall issue state they are one of a few that are not, in other states anyone who is not a felon can apply for and obtain a CHL/CCW permit without too much fuss. Again some states have a slight differences in requirements but that is the major jist of it.

I guess MD's thinking with letting people who carry cash have permits at a more liberal rate is that they are the ones who will be targeted for an armed robbery. Not that I agree that they are the only ones that should be allowed to CCW but that is the thinking, I suppose.

Politicans and celebrities are a whole 'nother can of worms, hypocrits to the max. People like Rosie O and others like her think they truely are more important than the average citizen.

 

[I_am_that_girl]

Maryland is not a shall issue state they are one of a few that are not, in other states anyone who is not a felon can apply for and obtain a CHL/CCW permit without too much fuss. Again some states have a slight differences in requirements but that is the major jist of it.

I guess MD's thinking with letting people who carry cash have permits at a more liberal rate is that they are the ones who will be targeted for an armed robbery. Not that I agree that they are the only ones that should be allowed to CCW but that is the thinking, I suppose.

Politicans and celebrities are a whole 'nother can of worms, hypocrits to the max. People like Rosie O and others like her think they truely are more important than the average citizen.

Our right under the constitution to bare arms is not being taken away from as we speak. The movement in DC is NOT a violation of our right under the constution. Our right was taken from us the day we had to start applying for licenses to own arms.

Should we be so tough on The officials in DC? There are things all of us have about our jobs that we don't like to do. But we do it because working and responsibility is what allows us to roam the land freely. Suppose we all quit because we don't like or agree with something or someone at work? We would all be robbing each other to get what we don't have. Point is don't blame Law Enforcement cause I believe they are on our side. They just do there jobs.

Police want illegal guns off of our streets and so do we. We want guns that are handled with respect and care. Not the guns that have been involved in an innocent childs murder. I certainly don't want to rightfully purchase a gun that was used to intimidate an innocent person out of thier property or one that was used to kill someone. We need murder weapons taken off of our streets. That is what Law Officers do.