PDA

View Full Version : Post Heller DC regulations - ripe for challenge


jchen76@gmail.com
07-14-2008, 2:42 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-07-14-dc-gun-law_N.htm

D.C. to vote on new gun bill following Supreme Court ruling

WASHINGTON (AP) The District of Columbia Council planned to vote Tuesday on emergency legislation to allow handguns if they are used only for self-defense in the home and carry fewer than 12 rounds of ammunition.
The legislation announced Monday comes as officials scramble to comply with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month striking down the city's 32-year-old ban.

The proposal, which maintains some of the city's strict gun ownership rules and adds more regulations, was immediately criticized by gun rights advocates threatening more legal action.

The nation's capital would still require rifles and shotguns be kept in the home unloaded and disassembled, or equipped with trigger locks. There would be an exception for guns used against the "reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm."

The proposed legislation also maintains the city's unusual regulation of machine guns, defined as weapons that shoot at least 12 rounds without reloading. That applies to most semiautomatic firearms.



The National Rifle Association strongly disagreed.

"Clearly, D.C. is doing everything they can to ignore the Supreme Court ruling," said Chris W. Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist. He said the organization would pursue legal or legislative action to thwart the city's efforts.

The legislation also would require a ballistics test to determine if a handgun is stolen or has been used in a crime. Police Chief Cathy Lanier will limit registration to one handgun per person for the first 90 days to make sure as many people are served as possible. And those who wish to register a handgun must pass written and vision tests.

Residents who already own handguns will be granted six months of amnesty to legally register their weapons, officials said.

The emergency legislation, which has strong support from the council, will remain in effect for 90 days. It adopts many of the regulations proposed earlier this month by D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson.

Mendelson, who is chairman of the committee on public safety and the judiciary, said the council would hold a hearing in September on permanent regulations.

D.C. officials anticipate more legal challenges as they try to maintain the strictest gun regulations possible under the law.

Critics were frustrated that the city plans to keep its ban on firearms capable of carrying 12 rounds or more. Alan Gura, the lawyer who successfully argued against D.C.'s handgun ban before the Supreme Court, has said such a restriction "almost certainly will be challenged."

The NRA's Cox also derided the trigger-lock requirement. "Unless a criminal is calling you before they break into your house, you're going to be left in same position you were prior to the (Supreme Court) case," he said.

Because the district has no licensed gun shops, residents who wish to purchase handguns will initially have to travel to shops elsewhere, such as Maryland or Virginia. They would have to present the shop with a certified police form authorizing the dealer to ship the weapon to a federally licensed gun dealer in Washington, where the buyer would pick it up.

There is currently only one licensed firearms dealer in D.C. who can handle such a transaction, said Mike Campbell, a spokesman for the Washington field division of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

"That's a lot to ask one person to do," Campbell said. "He's going to be inundated at the very beginning, I would imagine."


---

One gun every 90 days? Written and vision tests? Let me guess, you need 10/20 vision and a PHD in ballistics to get a handgun, which would ferret out 99% of the residents of DC.

hoffmang
07-14-2008, 2:44 PM
The rumblings I here are two fold. First, I doubt that the council will go through with their wish list completely as our side locally is keeping the heat on them to create a functional and non abusive licensing process. Second, the worst parts of the DC law look like they're going to be fixed by Congressional action - though I'm taking a wait and see attitude on that.

-Gene

24thMED
07-14-2008, 2:44 PM
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/

From the SCOTUS blog... Confused? me too...

D.C. plans new limit on handguns
Monday, July 14th, 2008 1:01 pm
Officials of the city government in Washington, D.C., on Monday proposed a new measure that would allow handguns to be in a ready-to-use condition only for prompt reactions to threats of “immediate harm” within the home. In a planned response to the Supreme Court’s June 26 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), local officials released the text of a “Firearms Control Emergency Act of 2008.” The City Council plans to act on the bill during a legislative session Tuesday, on an emergency basis, officials said.

A news release describing the bill and a new set of police regulations on guns can be found here. At the bottom of the release are links to a new amnesty proposal, the text of the proposed new gun law, and the text of proposed new regulations to implement that law when it is enacted by the City Council.

In the Supreme Court’s Heller decision, the Justices declared a new constitutional right to have a gun for self-defense in the home, and struck down a 1976 law so far as it barred possession of handguns in the home for self-defense. The Court also nullified a separate requirement that any gun kept in the home be unloaded and disassembled or have a trigger lock on.

Under the proposed new law for the city, handguns would have to be registered by anyone entitled to have such a gun. If the owner expects to use the gun for self-defense within the owner’s home, the owner would not need a separate license-to-carry for that purpose.

However, any gun kept in the owner’s home would have to be kept unloaded and disassembled or else disabled by a trigger lock. The only time that requirement is not in force, under the proposal law, would be when the gun was “being used to protect against a reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm to a person” within that person’s home.

That provision, officials told reporters, was meant to allow a handgun owner to get the gun and load it — for example, if a burglar were at the door. It would not allow the gun to be loaded or assembled or unlocked at all times it remained in the home.

Officials said they expected that this provision might be challenged in court by gun rights groups or individuals, on the theory that it is too restrictive and would not allow practical access to a working gun in an emergency.

Under the proposal, a handgun could be registered but only if it was submitted to police for a ballistics test, to determine whether it had been stolen or used in a crime. Registration would be limited to one gun per individual during the first 90 days the law was in effect.

Outside the home, handguns would generally be banned, except that they could be used elsewhere “for lawful recreational purposes” or could be carried “for a lawful purpose” allowed by federal or District law.

Under District law, the emergency bill would go into effect immediately, and remain in effect for no more than 90 days. The City Council will take up proposals for permanent legislation in September, it is understood.

The amnesty and police gun regulations disclosed Monday are designed to implement the new approach to gun control. The amnesty provision, in effect for six months, would mean that a person entitled to register a handgun would not be prosecuted for previously having an unregistered pistol. There would be no amnesty for any crime committed using the gun.

Saigon1965
07-14-2008, 2:51 PM
Complete utter BS. Oh, please wait while I load my weapon to confront you.

AJAX22
07-14-2008, 2:51 PM
Seriously?

*blink blink*

They get their butts handed to them by the SCOTUS and they turn around and try this B.S?

This needs to be taken to court again, and it nees to be laid out in very plain terms.

dasmi
07-14-2008, 2:54 PM
That provision, officials told reporters, was meant to allow a handgun owner to get the gun and load it — for example, if a burglar were at the door. It would not allow the gun to be loaded or assembled or unlocked at all times it remained in the home.
Right. Cause robbers tend to knock and announce themselves. What's the policy say when the bad guy is in your hallway advancing on your with a lead pipe?

Glock22Fan
07-14-2008, 3:01 PM
Right. Cause robbers tend to knock and announce themselves. What's the policy say when the bad guy is in your hallway advancing on your with a lead pipe?

Didn't one of the Justices refer to this already during the hearing? Something like: "So, I have to wake up, put the light on, find my glasses, find the key to the padlock . . . . ." Didn't that carry through into the result?

CSACANNONEER
07-14-2008, 3:02 PM
[url]

One gun every 90 days? Written and vision tests? Let me guess, you need 10/20 vision and a PHD in ballistics to get a handgun, which would ferret out 99% of the residents of DC.



Reread your own post.

The article says one gun per person for the first 90 days so more people can get one. I'm actually for that. Arm as many as possible. After the initial 90 days is up, they can buy more.


Written test? Yea, I think it's BS but, we have the same thing here in Ca.

Vision test! That's where I draw the line! I know people who regularly take groups BLIND children on shooting outings. The kids love it and can hit their targets! If they think they can get away with discriminating against people with disabilities, they've got another lawsuit coming!

yellowfin
07-14-2008, 3:15 PM
The question is whether it'll take another 5, 10, or 30 years to get these struck or if the SCOTUS will fast track it. Has the SC ever held someone in contempt? This gets asked in a lot of places, but does anyone have an answer?

IGOTDIRT4U
07-14-2008, 3:18 PM
The question is whether it'll take another 5, 10, or 30 years to get these struck or if the SCOTUS will fast track it. Has the SC ever held someone in contempt? This gets asked in a lot of places, but does anyone have an answer?

IIRC, the SC left it up to the lower court to enforce the ruling.

383green
07-14-2008, 3:19 PM
It sure looks to me like DC is openly defying the Heller decision. In a case like this, where SCOTUS makes a ruling and then the target of that ruling defies it, what is the next step? Does Heller need to file a new suit, or will SCOTUS initiate action by themselves? Can SCOTUS find people like DC's mayor to be in contempt of court? At some point, assuming that DC doesn't get with the program, would SCOTUS direct some other governmental entity to take some sort of action against DC officials?

bohoki
07-14-2008, 3:21 PM
there should be some way to hold the powers that be in contempt

wow what would the penalty be of contempt of the supreme court

dustoff31
07-14-2008, 3:23 PM
A question for our legal minds.

Say DC persists in being stupid and the people have to go back to court. Can they go directly to SCOTUS, or do they have to start all over again?

bulgron
07-14-2008, 3:23 PM
Does D.C. have an unlimited pool of funds that they can use to fight never-ending legal battles over their unconstitutional laws?

Is this like San Francisco where the city throws the legal business to law firms that are tight with the mayor?

bulgron
07-14-2008, 3:24 PM
there should be some way to hold the powers that be in contempt

wow what would the penalty be of contempt of the supreme court

End self-rule for D.C.

Subvertz
07-14-2008, 3:29 PM
there should be some way to hold the powers that be in contempt

wow what would the penalty be of contempt of the supreme court

I like the sound of contempt!
Remember when Fenty got up on the podium and said DC would comply?
Making official lies in the steps of the Supreme Court should be purjury too.
{please forgive spelling}

Subvertz
07-14-2008, 3:31 PM
A question for our legal minds.

Say DC persists in being stupid and the people have to go back to court. Can they go directly to SCOTUS, or do they have to start all over again?

That is the question of the hour....

dfletcher
07-14-2008, 3:31 PM
Fenty and his crew are no different than the segregationist folks who stonewalled Brown for as many as 20 years. Levy (Cato fellow) modeled his case after the civil rights cases of the 50s & 60s, Fenty is responding like Wallace and Russell and Patterson, et al. Fenty should just stand up and say they'll comply "with all deliberate speed".

hoffmang
07-14-2008, 3:32 PM
Any challenge to the new regs will be a new case. However, that new case has new precedent from Heller so DC will more consistently lose in the lower courts.

-Gene

Fjold
07-14-2008, 3:33 PM
there should be some way to hold the powers that be in contempt

wow what would the penalty be of contempt of the supreme court

I think that capitol punishment is not "cruel and unusual" in this case.

sorensen440
07-14-2008, 3:42 PM
is anyone actually surprised by this ?

24thMED
07-14-2008, 3:55 PM
is anyone actually surprised by this ?

Not really...

This reads to me as un-enforcable... Who is going to admit to not compling if they should have to protect themselves...

Yes officer, I unlocked and loaded my gun right before I shot the intruder who threatened me with bodily harm...

M. Sage
07-14-2008, 4:01 PM
.... I got to wake up at 3 AM the other night because my dog was going nuts barking at the front door. It took me a second to realize that she was barking at the front door. By the time I picked up my gun, light and glasses, someone would have been on top of me. If I had to unlock/load it, too? No way, and my bedroom is a fair distance from the front door.

I can't imagine anybody actually following a law like this. There's just no way.

Soldier415
07-14-2008, 4:01 PM
You can't fix stupid...

jamesob
07-14-2008, 4:31 PM
i would say that these days you are at a threat 24/7 in your home. so i would have it loaded 24/7.

duenor
07-14-2008, 4:32 PM
Under the proposal, a handgun could be registered but only if it was submitted to police for a ballistics test, to determine whether it had been stolen or used in a crime.

tyrist
07-14-2008, 4:40 PM
Under the proposal, a handgun could be registered but only if it was submitted to police for a ballistics test, to determine whether it had been stolen or used in a crime.

I believe that refers to the amnesty in the new law. If you previously had an unregistered handgun you are okay to register it as long as you do the ballistics tests.

The supreme court won't fast track it, this new law will be struck down by the lower courts and I doubt DC is going to keep throwing good money after bad trying to defend it.

Raystonn
07-14-2008, 4:40 PM
wow what would the penalty be of contempt of the supreme court
The executive branch is charged with enforcing the U.S. Constitution, the laws written by Congress and signed into law, and the judicial orders of the U.S. Supreme Court. The President of the United States has legal authority to send troops or federal marshals for enforcement purposes. However, a simple threat of arrest from someone of authority in the executive branch is usually sufficient to commence bowel evacuation and subsequent compliance these days.

-Raystonn

jerryg1776
07-14-2008, 4:58 PM
Yes officer, I unlocked and loaded my gun right before I shot the intruder who threatened me with bodily harm...

Then it could be argued that its not really a case of self defense if one has the time and ability to get up, configure/put together the weapon and then load it. Its more like its a premeditated action so there goes the old in immediate fear for my life, safety and that of others.

Hell, 911 may actually be better than having to do all that!

Draven
07-14-2008, 5:13 PM
But apparently you can legislate it.

Mikeb
07-14-2008, 5:15 PM
The executive branch is charged with enforcing the U.S. Constitution, the laws written by Congress and signed into law, and the judicial orders of the U.S. Supreme Court. The President of the United States has legal authority to send troops or federal marshals for enforcement purposes. However, a simple threat of arrest from someone of authority in the executive branch is usually sufficient to commence bowel evacuation and subsequent compliance these days.

-Raystonn


So the President has to call out the militia ?
Any volunteers?
Mike

USN CHIEF
07-14-2008, 5:28 PM
So the President has to call out the militia ?
Any volunteers?
Mike

I am game....:D

fairfaxjim
07-14-2008, 5:38 PM
there should be some way to hold the powers that be in contempt

wow what would the penalty be of contempt of the supreme court

Nuke 'em!

It is begining to sound like Marion Barry
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Marionbarry001.jpg/225px-
left a bunch of crack laying around there and these guys have been smoking it BIG TIME. Stupidity among DC government has a proud and long history.

Shotgun Man
07-14-2008, 5:46 PM
I believe that refers to the amnesty in the new law. If you previously had an unregistered handgun you are okay to register it as long as you do the ballistics tests.

The supreme court won't fast track it, this new law will be struck down by the lower courts and I doubt DC is going to keep throwing good money after bad trying to defend it.


From reading the text of the bill, I conclude that all handguns have to be registered. Ballistic testing is part of registration process. So all handguns in DC have to be subjected to ballistic testing. I'm not quite sure what ballistic testing is. Can they just take an image of a spent casing and run it through a computer database like running someone's fingerprints?

In any event, it is extremely oppressive. It's a low-tech version of CA ammo microstamping bill. You got to hand it to those DC legislators for taking advantage of a situation.

ETA: I think some states have similar requirements in place? I know I've purchased guns that came with a spent casing. So some states must require one must be submitted to the gov.

Solidsnake87
07-14-2008, 6:06 PM
lol. Wow. These guys are damn stubborn.

Pvt. Cowboy
07-14-2008, 6:11 PM
The rumblings I here are two fold. First, I doubt that the council will go through with their wish list completely

It's interesting to note that they seemed to have backed out on their semi-automatic ban. They must be getting some legal advice from anti-gun lawyers who think that might risk another trip to SCOTUS which could hold that semi-autos cannot be banned. Losing that case would cause lower courts to just declare that full autos can't be banned.

Notice also that their magazine cutoff is twelve rounds. Not ten, but twelve. Even in what was formerly the nation's strictest gun control principality, you can now have more rounds in your magazine than a Californian.

hoffmang
07-14-2008, 6:41 PM
It's interesting to note that they seemed to have backed out on their semi-automatic ban. They must be getting some legal advice from anti-gun lawyers who think that might risk another trip to SCOTUS which could hold that semi-autos cannot be banned. Losing that case would cause lower courts to just declare that full autos can't be banned.

Notice also that their magazine cutoff is twelve rounds. Not ten, but twelve. Even in what was formerly the nation's strictest gun control principality, you can now have more rounds in your magazine than a Californian.

I'm mildly confused by your post. DC has not yet given up on defining any handgun that can accept a magazine that accepts 12 or more rounds fired semiautomatically as a machinegun. I do completely agree with you that not changing that little law would be a gift to the pro-gun side.

Also note that the "12 round semi is a machine gun" dates from the 34 Act era.

-Gene

tyrist
07-14-2008, 6:48 PM
It's interesting to note that they seemed to have backed out on their semi-automatic ban. They must be getting some legal advice from anti-gun lawyers who think that might risk another trip to SCOTUS which could hold that semi-autos cannot be banned. Losing that case would cause lower courts to just declare that full autos can't be banned.

Notice also that their magazine cutoff is twelve rounds. Not ten, but twelve. Even in what was formerly the nation's strictest gun control principality, you can now have more rounds in your magazine than a Californian.

If 12 is classified as a machinegun I am going to assume you can only have a 10 round magazine plus one loaded in the chamber for an 11 round capacity which is the same as california.

24thMED
07-14-2008, 6:52 PM
Then it could be argued that its not really a case of self defense if one has the time and ability to get up, configure/put together the weapon and then load it. Its more like its a premeditated action so there goes the old in immediate fear for my life, safety and that of others.

Hell, 911 may actually be better than having to do all that!

Maybe but I think intent has a part in it too... what was your intent when you unlocked your gun and loaded it...

At that point, just to protect myself...

pre-meditation can occur in the split second before you pull the trigger... doesn't have to be an elaborate plan...

Californio
07-14-2008, 8:09 PM
If 12 is classified as a machinegun I am going to assume you can only have a 10 round magazine plus one loaded in the chamber for an 11 round capacity which is the same as california.

IF am reading correctly, it is the capacity to accept. Thus in their eyes my California Legal XD-45 with a 10 round magazine has the "Capacity to Accept" a larger magazine and is a "MachineGun" in D.C. So since almost any semi-auto can accept a larger magazine, even if it extends beyond the grip they are "MachineGuns". That limits the handgun choice to a Revolver only in D.C.

6172crew
07-14-2008, 8:23 PM
IF am reading correctly, it is the capacity to accept. Thus in their eyes my California Legal XD-45 with a 10 round magazine has the "Capacity to Accept" a larger magazine and is a "MachineGun" in D.C. So since almost any semi-auto can accept a larger magazine, even if it extends beyond the grip they are "MachineGuns". That limits the handgun choice to a Revolver only in D.C.


it would be nice for them to bring on the MG ban....They will loose big time imo.

383green
07-14-2008, 8:46 PM
These idiots are making it so easy for our side.

Maybe these DC folks are actually brilliant pro-gun advocates, who have had the inspiration that by embracing the anti-gun agenda and pushing it to its most absurd extremes, they can force positive change?

:rolleyes:

:confused:

:rofl2:

No, you were right. They're idiots, and they're giving us what we want, need and deserve on a silver platter thanks to their legendary hubris.

hoffmang
07-14-2008, 8:52 PM
Just for reference, this is DC's definition of a machine gun:


(10) “Machine gun” means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot:

(A) Automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger;

(B) Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.

-Gene

Pvt. Cowboy
07-14-2008, 9:24 PM
DC has not yet given up on defining any handgun that can accept a magazine that accepts 12 or more rounds fired semiautomatically as a machinegun

Just after the Heller ruling, DC stated that no semi-auto handguns would be allowed into their registry. It now seems as though a resident can register a semi-auto as long as it doesn't have a magazine capacity of 13 or more rounds. That's a clear backtrack, unless they're unwittingly setting up to hand RKBA another future victory by keeping the semi-auto ban in place.

We can't be this lucky, can we? :eek:

Glock22Fan
07-14-2008, 9:31 PM
Almost any semi-auto is capable of accepting a magazine over twelve rounds, even if, at present, you don't own such a mag and indeed maybe noone even manufactures such a mag.

Even a 1911 can take 25 round magazines, I think Cheaper Than Dirt sells them.

I have a Grendel that would pass the test, as the (10 rounds 0.380ACP) magazine is fixed (built into the butt). Not much else would.

CCWFacts
07-14-2008, 9:33 PM
That's my impression. Any handgun that doesn't have a fixed mag (which is almost every handgun in use today) is an "MG" according to them. Whatever! That's going to be quickly demolished.

hoffmang
07-14-2008, 9:48 PM
Just after the Heller ruling, DC stated that no semi-auto handguns would be allowed into their registry. It now seems as though a resident can register a semi-auto as long as it doesn't have a magazine capacity of 13 or more rounds. That's a clear backtrack, unless they're unwittingly setting up to hand RKBA another future victory by keeping the semi-auto ban in place.

We can't be this lucky, can we? :eek:

What I've been reading is showing that they have no intention of changing the definition of machine gun - which bars most semiauto handguns. "Readily converted or restored to shoot Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading" is a pretty low bar. We gun aware folks would say that doesn't define a 1911 as a machine gun in their parlance but does define most any double stack 9mm as a machine gun. I'm sure that if DC isn't going to correct the Machine Gun definition they're going to take the position that a 1911 is a machine gun because there exists an 11+ round magazine (+1 in the chamber...)

-Gene

Ford8N
07-15-2008, 4:46 AM
Maybe these DC folks are actually brilliant pro-gun advocates, who have had the inspiration that by embracing the anti-gun agenda and pushing it to its most absurd extremes, they can force positive change?

:rolleyes:

:confused:

:rofl2:

No, you were right. They're idiots, and they're giving us what we want, need and deserve on a silver platter thanks to their legendary hubris.

Manchurian Candidate? Taking tips from the Lockyer BOF-DOJ?

Who knows, it's all good.

:43:

aileron
07-15-2008, 5:49 AM
Just for reference, this is DC's definition of a machine gun:

(10) “Machine gun” means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot:

(A) Automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger;

(B) Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.


-Gene

Boy this one looks like its going to be shot down soon. Wonder how long thats going to take, and if Levy kind of knew this was out there waiting in the wings? Makes him one smart cookie. That their definition is not mechanically logical.

MolonLabe2008
07-15-2008, 6:22 AM
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!!!!!

I guess Mayor Fenty and his cohorts didn't get the memo about the SCOTUS ruling on an individual right.

Let me see...

1) Restrict to "self-defense" only = Infringement.

2) Magazine restriction = Infringement.

3) Unloaded requirement = Infringement.

4) Disassembly requirement = Infringement.

5) Trigger lock requirement = Infringement.

6) DC's ridiculous definition of machine gun = Infringement.

Mayor Fenty needs to be frog marched off to jail for contempt of court.

383green
07-15-2008, 6:34 AM
Mayor Fenty needs to be frog marched off to jail for contempt of court.


Yes, he does, but let's let him make a fool of himself for a while longer first! It seems to me like he's paving the road to get positive rulings on even more details beyond the scope of Heller. Heck, let's suggest still more gun ban ideas to him! He can implement them with apoplectic fervor, only to get them shot down by the favorable circuit and supreme courts we have at the moment! :43:

He's digging himself a hole, but it happens to be right where we want to put our swimming pool! :D

dfletcher
07-15-2008, 8:08 AM
What I've been reading is showing that they have no intention of changing the definition of machine gun - which bars most semiauto handguns. "Readily converted or restored to shoot Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading" is a pretty low bar. We gun aware folks would say that doesn't define a 1911 as a machine gun in their parlance but does define most any double stack 9mm as a machine gun. I'm sure that if DC isn't going to correct the Machine Gun definition they're going to take the position that a 1911 is a machine gun because there exists an 11+ round magazine (+1 in the chamber...)

-Gene

I still don't understand how they have the ability to do that - if they can, why can they not also use language that includes lever action rifles as machineguns? You mentioned 1934, NFA I presume - what are the specifics?

A machine gun is defined by federal law, is it not? DC doesn't have to abide by that?

You know who must be really PO'd? Marion Barry - using the "machine gun" logic, he could have simply decreed crack is actually Alka Seltzer.

hoffmang
07-15-2008, 9:32 AM
This definition was set into DC law before home rule. Congress passed that definition before the 34 Act as I recall. DC has the power to change that but is choosing not to for somewhat baffling political reasons. But as the_quark always says: The best way to predict the behavior of a large bureaucratic organization is to assume it is run by a cabal intent on it's downfall.

-Gene

jacques
07-15-2008, 10:27 AM
The best way to predict the behavior of a large bureaucratic organization is to assume it is run by a cabal intent on it's downfall.

-Gene

That is sooooooooooo true.