Apropos of David Gregory’s violation of Washington, D.C.’s strict liability standard capacity magazine ban, and the D.C. attorney general’s decision to forego prosecution:
Historically, selective enforcement is recognized as a sign of tyranny, and an abuse of power, because it violates rule of law, allowing men to apply justice only when they choose. Aside from this being inherently unjust, it almost inevitably must lead to favoritism and extortion, with those empowered to choose being able to help their friends, take bribes, and threaten those from they desire favors.
Of course, if you’re not David Gregory, and don’t have David Gregory’s connections, the D.C. attorney general is not nearly so understanding.
Tens–likely hundreds–of millions of such magazines are lawfully possessed in the United States by law-abiding gun owners. More than 1 million PMAGs are backordered from Magpul. Brownells sold through three-and-a-half years worth of magazines in three days.
Magazines like the one Gregory displayed on Meet the Press, and Magpul’s PMAG, are not complicated; they are made up of a box and a spring. Given the sheer number of standard capacity magazines in the United States, and the infrequency of mass shootings (they are not becoming more common, and your chances of being killed in a mass shooting are about the same as your chances of being struck by lightning), these magazines, as well as the AR-15 rifle (and all semi-automatic weapons) are in common use for lawful purposes.
If in common use is to mean anything at all, it must cover the AR-15–America’s most popular rifle–and standard capacity magazines.
Because Emily Miller spent more on training, permitting, and registration ($465) before the government allowed her to buy a gun than I did just to buy my first gun (no registration, permitting, training, fingerprinting, or anything else required). My Bersa Thunder 380 CC was (IIRC) right at $300.
Now, I did have to spend ~$125 on a CCW training course and fingerprinting, and another $145 for the FBI background check and state CCW application processing, but that was to be licensed to carry, not merely to own the handgun. And even that, I think, is far too excessive. I shudder to think what DC’s carry fees would be (if they allowed any form of carry at all, which they do not).
High registration or permitting costs are one of the easiest ways for politicians to keep guns away from those they don’t believe should have them; in places like Washington, DC and New York City, that’s pretty much the entire populace.
Dave Barry’s summary of all of the tragedies of 2011 is excellent; I especially like this bit:
I’m not saying that the entire year was ruined by sleaze. It was also ruined by other bad things. . . . It was a year in which a significant earthquake struck Washington, yet failed to destroy a single federal agency.
We can always hope that the next DC quake is more effective.
Countdown to froth-mouthed anti-gunners ranting about how speech is different from guns in 3, 2, 1 …
A ban on a class of arms is not an “incidental” regulation. It is equivalent to a ban on a category of speech. Such restrictions on core enumerated constitutional protections are not subjected to mere intermediate scrutiny review. The majority opinion here is in uncharted territory in suggesting that intermediate scrutiny can apply to an outright ban on possession of a class of weapons that have not traditionally been banned.
That’s DC circuit judge Brett Kavanaugh, writing in his dissent from the recent ruling on Heller’s lawsuit regarding several problems with DC’s post-Heller firearms registration regulations (the consensus is that he tried to shoehorn too much into the suit instead of taking a more incremental approach).
It’s not just gunbloggers that analogize restrictions on the RKBA to restrictions on speech; now it’s federal judges, too.
Let the PSH commence!