# Eleanor Holmes Norton Made a Mistake (Voting Rights for DC / Gun Rights for DC) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 29, 2014, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352 "2014-07-29T20:04:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/21 "2014-07-30T18:49:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now, only non-residents may carry unregistered weapons. No, neither residents nor non-resident can carry registered or unregistered firearms for the next 89 days, until the DC government figures out whether it wishes to continue litigating or pass a new law. > [@](#): > > So the question is: was losing a House and Senate voting voice for DC worth being able to forbid DC residents, and only DC residents, from carrying unregistered handguns? Well, it would have been one House seat for DC and an additional House seat for Utah, I believe until the 2020 census and redistricting (I could be misremembering that part), and no Senate seats. Essentially, you’re asking whether the people of DC would be more comfortable with a non-voting representative in Congress and gun laws that probably look a lot like California’s, as directed by the city council; or have a representative in Congress and have gun laws that look like Texas’, as directed by Congress. Would you really take the latter deal? ETA: Oh yeah, you probably would. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/22 "2014-07-30T19:45:01Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > No, neither residents nor non-resident can carry registered or unregistered firearms for the next 89 days, until the DC government figures out whether it wishes to continue litigating or pass a new law. That’s an open question. The decision is stayed, but an unconstitutional law is void _ab initio_. If DC’s current law is finally adjudicated unconstitutional, no one charged today under it can be punished. Well, it would have been one House seat for DC and an additional House seat for Utah, I believe until the 2020 census and redistricting (I could be misremembering that part), and no Senate seats. > [@](#): > > Essentially, you’re asking whether the people of DC would be more comfortable with a non-voting representative in Congress and gun laws that probably look a lot like California’s, as directed by the city council; or have a representative in Congress and have gun laws that look like Texas’, as directed by Congress. > > Would you really take the latter deal? ETA: Oh yeah, you probably would. 🙂 Yes, and it amazes me that many people wouldn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/23 "2014-07-30T19:50:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, it does. And that’s certainly how it should be done – local legislation, bounded by the Second Amendment. > > I guess I’m suggesting that when you look at the delta – the difference between the version of laws DC would have under the Ensign amendment and the one they’ll end up with now – you don’t find a huge amount of disparity. > > You’re right: the Ensign amendment would have allowed unregistered firearms for residents. Now, only non-residents may carry unregistered weapons. So the question is: was losing a House and Senate voting voice for DC worth being able to forbid DC residents, and only DC residents, from carrying unregistered handguns? The judge stayed the order so for 90 days the old law still remains. The DC council is expected to pass an onerous set of carry permit regulations. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/24 "2014-07-30T19:51:53Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Silent in this context does not mean that any mention is absent. It means that the opinion does not draw conclusions on the right to bear. Bearing arms was not part of the questions presented and therefore were not opined upon. Dicta. or you could read the restriction on carrying guns in federal buildings as the exception that proves the rule. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/25 "2014-07-30T19:54:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s an open question. The decision is stayed, but an unconstitutional law is void _ab initio_. If DC’s current law is finally adjudicated unconstitutional, no one charged today under it can be punished. What is to stop the Washington DC City Council from [simply ignoring](http://gunowners.org/a072808.htm)laws they don’t like? [Not that they are the only ones](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/16/us/sheriffs-refuse-to-enforce-laws-on-gun-control.html?_r=0), of course. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/26 "2014-07-30T20:45:34Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > What is to stop the Washington DC City Council from [simply ignoring](http://gunowners.org/a072808.htm)laws they don’t like? You know that DC’s laws conform with Heller, don’t you? How do you think that happened? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/27 "2014-07-30T21:13:55Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > You know that DC’s laws conform with Heller, don’t you? How do you think that happened? DC laws only conform with heller in teh sense taht they are not an absolute bar to owning a handgun. The hurdle is so high that I think it is not an effective bar to the exercise of a constitutional right. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/28 "2014-07-30T21:34:17Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > DC laws only conform with heller in teh sense taht they are not an absolute bar to owning a handgun. Here are the steps to buying a handgun in DC: 1. Buy a handgun at a gun store and have it transferred to a FFL holder in DC, in accordance with Federal law. 2. Fill out a form and have it signed by you and the seller. 3. Bring the form to the police department. 4. Show that you have taken a 30 minute online safety course. 5. Certify that you are not blind. 6. Pass a multiple choice test with 70% or better. 7. Have your fingerprints taken. 8. Pay $48. 9. Five days later, get your approved form from the police department and pick up your handgun. Sure, it isn’t as easy as in other states, but it isn’t onerous, either. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/29 "2014-07-30T21:39:30Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > You know that DC’s laws conform with Heller, don’t you? How do you think that happened? That happened because they kept getting sued. The taxpayers of DC have generously contributed to the efforts of gun rights advocacy. Not only have they lost on the issues, they also got sued for the amount of attorney’s fees, and have lost on that matter as well. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Here are the steps to buying a handgun in DC: > > 1. Buy a handgun at a gun store and have it transferred to a FFL holder in DC, in accordance with Federal law. > 2. Fill out a form and have it signed by you and the seller. > 3. Bring the form to the police department. > 4. Show that you have taken a 30 minute online safety course. > 5. Certify that you are not blind. > 6. Pass a multiple choice test with 70% or better. > 7. Have your fingerprints taken. > 8. Pay $48. > 9. Five days later, get your approved form from the police department and pick up your handgun. > > Sure, it isn’t as easy as in other states, but it isn’t onerous, either. If you had to do this to vote, I don’t think you’d be as blasé. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/30 "2014-07-30T21:50:53Z")
The entire debate in this thread seems to be based on the constitutionality of D.C.'s firearms restrictions, and not at all on whether the D.C. voting rights act would have been constitutional. It was absolutely correct of Norton and other House members to refuse the compromise. It would merely have muddied the waters in the courts of the basic act. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/31 "2014-07-30T21:57:19Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Here are the steps to buying a handgun in DC: > > 1. Buy a handgun at a gun store and have it transferred to a FFL holder in DC, in accordance with Federal law. > 2. Fill out a form and have it signed by you and the seller. > 3. Bring the form to the police department. > 4. Show that you have taken a 30 minute online safety course. > 5. Certify that you are not blind. > 6. Pass a multiple choice test with 70% or better. > 7. Have your fingerprints taken. > 8. Pay $48. > 9. Five days later, get your approved form from the police department and pick up your handgun. > > Sure, it isn’t as easy as in other states, but it isn’t onerous, either. Those steps are not onerous, I agree. You left some things out, though. For example, DC Official Code §22-4508 requires a ten-day wait between the purchase date and the date the DC FFL holder may release the firearm to begin the application process. The fee the FFL charges for the transfer is $125. This fee simply covers accepting a gun purchased elsewhere and delivering it to a DC resident. It’s true that – in a sense – this is a federal requirement. But the federal requirement only applies here because DC zooming laws do not permit a gun seller to open a place of business in DC. If an FFL seller existed in DC, this fee would not exist. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/32 "2014-07-30T21:58:37Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > The entire debate in this thread seems to be based on the constitutionality of D.C.'s firearms restrictions, and not at all on whether the D.C. voting rights act would have been constitutional. It was absolutely correct of Norton and other House members to refuse the compromise. It would merely have muddied the waters in the courts of the basic act. How? Specifically. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/33 "2014-07-30T22:05:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > How? Specifically. Oh, come now, **Bricker**. You know I’m not a lawyer. Why don’t you tell me why a trial court would not have to look at all parts of the law. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/34 "2014-07-30T23:00:59Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Oh, come now, **Bricker**. You know I’m not a lawyer. Why don’t you tell me why a trial court would not have to look at all parts of the law. You said the compromise would have “muddied the waters,” somehow. I have no idea how. So I’m asking you to specify what you meant. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/35 "2014-07-30T23:09:06Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You said the compromise would have “muddied the waters,” somehow. I have no idea how. So I’m asking you to specify what you meant. A court would have had to look at both aspects of the law; both the voting rights\* for D.C. aspect, and the firearms aspect. Either, or both, could have been constitutional, or not. \*I’d like to note that it took me some time to figure out what the voting rights aspect was. It was to give D.C. a voting member of the House of Representatives, and to give another Representative to Utah. Do you, **Bricker** , believe that would be constitutional? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2014, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/36 "2014-07-30T23:42:41Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > A court would have had to look at both aspects of the law; both the voting rights\* for D.C. aspect, and the firearms aspect. Either, or both, could have been constitutional, or not. > > \*I’d like to note that it took me some time to figure out what the voting rights aspect was. It was to give D.C. a voting member of the House of Representatives, and to give another Representative to Utah. Do you, **Bricker** , believe that would be constitutional? It’s a tough call. While Art I., Sec. 2, says that Representatives are chosen every second year by the people of the states, Sec. 5 says that the House is the sole judge of its own members qualifications. So I’d adopt an initial position that the provision is constitutional, and see what arguments might sway me. By the way, in this particular circumstance, it wasn’t an “either or both” could be constitutional. The bill included a provision that said if any portion of the law were found unconstitutional, the whole thing had no force or effect. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/37 "2014-07-31T03:36:08Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Here are the steps to buying a handgun in DC: > > 1. Buy a handgun at a gun store and have it transferred to a FFL holder in DC, in accordance with Federal law. > 2. Fill out a form and have it signed by you and the seller. > 3. Bring the form to the police department. > 4. Show that you have taken a 30 minute online safety course. > 5. Certify that you are not blind. > 6. Pass a multiple choice test with 70% or better. > 7. Have your fingerprints taken. > 8. Pay $48. > 9. Five days later, get your approved form from the police department and pick up your handgun. > > Sure, it isn’t as easy as in other states, but it isn’t onerous, either. Hmmm. Then they must have changed the requirements. On its face, this doesn’t look that bad. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/38 "2014-07-31T03:42:36Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Those steps are not onerous, I agree. > > You left some things out, though. For example, DC Official Code §22-4508 requires a ten-day wait between the purchase date and the date the DC FFL holder may release the firearm to begin the application process. > > The fee the FFL charges for the transfer is $125. This fee simply covers accepting a gun purchased elsewhere and delivering it to a DC resident. It’s true that – in a sense – this is a federal requirement. But the federal requirement only applies here because DC zooming laws do not permit a gun seller to open a place of business in DC. If an FFL seller existed in DC, this fee would not exist. A ten day waiting period seems unnecessary. What are they waiting for? $125 is is high, I pay about $25 for gun transfers from out of state. You can probably find guns at least $50 cheaper on the internet than you would at a local gun store. Frankly, you can get a concealed firearm permit in Virginia for about $50 and its obvious that the DC registration doesn’t come with a carry permit. BTW, can you do all this stuff on the weekends? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/39 "2014-07-31T03:43:59Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > That happened because they kept getting sued. The taxpayers of DC have generously contributed to the efforts of gun rights advocacy. Not only have they lost on the issues, they also got sued for the amount of attorney’s fees, and have lost on that matter as well. > > If you had to do this to vote, I don’t think you’d be as blasé. Its not perfect but its a hell of an improvement over what they came up with immediately after the lawsuits. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352/40 "2014-07-31T12:30:52Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Here are the steps to buying a handgun in DC: > > 1. Buy a handgun at a gun store and have it transferred to a FFL holder in DC, in accordance with Federal law. > 2. Fill out a form and have it signed by you and the seller. > 3. Bring the form to the police department. > 4. Show that you have taken a 30 minute online safety course. > 5. Certify that you are not blind. > 6. Pass a multiple choice test with 70% or better. > 7. Have your fingerprints taken. > 8. Pay $48. > 9. Five days later, get your approved form from the police department and pick up your handgun. > > Sure, it isn’t as easy as in other states, but it isn’t onerous, either. For what it’s worth, this looks easier than it was for me to get a license to purchase a long gun in NJ (also required to purchase a BB gun(!)). For a hand gun, I think the process is similar to buying a long gun, but it’s only good for 60 days or something. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eleanor-holmes-norton-made-a-mistake-voting-rights-for-dc-gun-rights-for-dc/694352.md?page=3)