D.C. Residents Able to Buy Handguns

[lioneaglegriffin]

D.C. Residents Able to Buy Handguns Sept. 9
By Tracey Taylor


WASHINGTON, D.C. - District residents will be able to buy handguns starting Sept. 9, according to a report by WTOP radio in Washington, D.C.

The District began registering handguns in mid-July in response to a Supreme Court ruling that overturned the city's long time ban. But, as of last month, only 11 handguns had been registered. The low number could be because there was no way for residents to buy a handgun and get it transferred into the city. That's about to change.

Charles Sykes, the only licensed firearms dealer in the District willing to transfer handguns for individuals, told WTOP that he will be charging a $125 fee to transfer each handgun.




ONLY 11! the 2nd Amend. Enforcement bill needs to be passed

oh and a Hallowed 9/11 to everyone

[dfletcher]

D.C. Residents Able to Buy Handguns Sept. 9
By Tracey Taylor


WASHINGTON, D.C. - District residents will be able to buy handguns starting Sept. 9, according to a report by WTOP radio in Washington, D.C.

The District began registering handguns in mid-July in response to a Supreme Court ruling that overturned the city's long time ban. But, as of last month, only 11 handguns had been registered. The low number could be because there was no way for residents to buy a handgun and get it transferred into the city. That's about to change.

Charles Sykes, the only licensed firearms dealer in the District willing to transfer handguns for individuals, told WTOP that he will be charging a $125 fee to transfer each handgun.



ONLY 11! the 2nd Amend. Enforcement bill needs to be passed

oh and a Hallowed 9/11 to everyone

Hopefully Mr. Sykes will have a profitable but short run with these rates - by either pending legislation being passed to allow DC purchases in MD & VA or by in state competition.

BTW, what's to prevent DC from setting up fees (transfer, registration, locks, etc) that add up just enough to discourage gun ownership? Nothing outrageous & obvious - but just enough in totality to make folks say "the hell with it".

My experience is that it's almost as effective to persuade or manipulate folks into doing without something as it is to ban a particular item. Make it a bit more costly, require 2 or 3 steps instead of 1 and the people who will follow through peel off. I know many folks in CA who would buy a handgun if it were a simple process. But taking the test ($25.00) then buying the gun and lock (+$10.00 for the lock) then returning 10 days later (more gas $$$, take off work/family time, traffic) and I see their eyes glaze over as I describe it to them.

I hope (and presume) NRA is watching closely.

[shark92651]

Are they only allowing revolvers at this time? Are they still pushing the "semi-auto is a machine gun" argument?

[lioneaglegriffin]

Hopefully Mr. Sykes will have a profitable but short run with these rates - by either pending legislation being passed to allow DC purchases in MD & VA or by in state competition.

BTW, what's to prevent DC from setting up fees (transfer, registration, locks, etc) that add up just enough to discourage gun ownership? Nothing outrageous & obvious - but just enough in totality to make folks say "the hell with it".

My experience is that it's almost as effective to persuade or manipulate folks into doing without something as it is to ban a particular item. Make it a bit more costly, require 2 or 3 steps instead of 1 and the people who will follow through peel off. I know many folks in CA who would buy a handgun if it were a simple process. But taking the test ($25.00) then buying the gun and lock (+$10.00 for the lock) then returning 10 days later (more gas $$$, take off work/family time, traffic) and I see their eyes glaze over as I describe it to them.

I hope (and presume) NRA is watching closely.



here is the bill that was introduced and hopefully passes.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6691:

it does say something about making it difficult for people to get a firearm.

SEC. 3. REFORM D.C. COUNCIL'S AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT FIREARMS.

Section 4 of the Act entitled `An Act to prohibit the killing of wild birds and wild animals in the District of Columbia', approved June 30, 1906 (34 Stat. 809; sec. 1-303.43, D.C. Official Code) is amended by adding at the end the following: `Nothing in this section or any other provision of law shall authorize, or shall be construed to permit, the Council, the Mayor, or any governmental or regulatory authority of the District of Columbia to prohibit, constructively prohibit, or unduly burden the ability of persons not prohibited from possessing firearms under Federal law from acquiring, possessing in their homes or businesses, or using for sporting, self-protection or other lawful purposes, any firearm neither prohibited by Federal law nor subject to the National Firearms Act. The District of Columbia shall not have authority to enact laws or regulations that discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms.'.

[lioneaglegriffin]

Are they only allowing revolvers at this time? Are they still pushing the "semi-auto is a machine gun" argument?

SEC. 4. REPEAL D.C. SEMIAUTOMATIC BAN.

(a) In General- Section 101(10) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2501.01(10), D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows:

`(10) `Machine gun' means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or readily restored to shoot automatically, more than 1 shot without manual reloading by a single function of the trigger, and includes the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machine gun, and any combination of parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.'.

(b) Conforming Amendment to Provisions Setting Forth Criminal Penalties- Section 1(c) of the Act of July 8, 1932 (47 Stat. 651; sec. 22-4501(c), D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) `Machine gun', as used in this Act, has the meaning given such term in section 101(10) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975.'.

[lioneaglegriffin]

The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has passed the bill on.
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2163

Committee Marks Up District of Columbia Gun Bill


The Committee held a business meeting to consider legislation to address gun laws in the District of Columbia, and various other matters, on Wednesday, September 10, 2008.

The Issa amendment passed by a voice vote, and the amended bill was passed by a bipartisan vote of 21 to 1.

[hawk1]

Only $125 to transfer handguns? That's cheap compared to some dealers here in California...:cool:

[lioneaglegriffin]

Only $125 to transfer handguns? That's cheap compared to some dealers here in California...:cool:

when your they only guy in town....

that counts as pretty much a local monopoly for the time being.

And you can charge what ever you want. :(

of course the price has to be within reason otherwise no one will give you their business

[rayra]

Jim Crow alive and well. I’m sure he’s more a Capitalist Pig that a Racist one, but that’s what it amounts to. Same with the fearmongering slander of ‘Saturday Night Specials’, and various ‘Safe Product’ laws that did nothing more than remove affordable arms from the reach of the poor. Truthfully, much of those pistols were cheap crap, but when the choice for a person on a fixed limited income comes down to a $500 ‘quality’ pistol and eating, well they go disarmed. As the socialist legislators intended.

[zcktomcat]

I would probally charge a ton too. If your the only one in town it's alot easier for the government to hassle you and sue your business into oblivion. If he's smart he's putting that money towards a good lawyer.