# Palmer vs. DC (Right to Bear Arms) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 28, 2014, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237 "2014-07-28T13:32:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**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, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/21 "2014-07-30T21:28:02Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I understand that the heart of the matter here is that the DC government did not allow such instruction, but as a practical matter, a DC resident complaining that they can’t have various services within city limits falls on deaf ears with me. Want to go to an airport? Oh my gosh, you have to leave DC. Want to buy a new car? Either you buy a VW or you have to go to Maryland or Virginia. Want to buy golf clubs? I don’t think you can actually buy a set of irons anywhere in DC anymore. Want to play paintball? Yep, out of luck. How about if you want to plant a tree in your back yard? Well, there’s that Home Depot on Rhode Island Avenue, otherwise you’re headed for the suburbs. > > The idea that life in DC sometimes involves trips to the suburbs to do things is like saying that it can be warm here in July. No kidding, Sherlock. And does the law require the use of golf clubs to exercise a constitutionally protected right? > [@](#): > > The fact that Emily Miller claims that it took her more than a week – and then ultimately signed up for a class with someone not even on that list and everything worked out fine – once again indicates she is probably not capable of intermediate-level life skills. I think she was obviously putting things in a bad light where she could but I would ask what other constitutional right requires so much effort to exercise? It takes me literally 15 minutes to buy a gun in Virginia if I already know what I want to get and yet Virginia (or any city within Virginia) seems just as safe as DC. ---
**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, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/22 "2014-07-30T21:36:03Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I understand that the heart of the matter here is that the DC government did not allow such instruction, but as a practical matter, a DC resident complaining that they can’t have various services within city limits falls on deaf ears with me. Want to go to an airport? Oh my gosh, you have to leave DC. Want to buy a new car? Either you buy a VW or you have to go to Maryland or Virginia. Want to buy golf clubs? I don’t think you can actually buy a set of irons anywhere in DC anymore. Want to play paintball? Yep, out of luck. How about if you want to plant a tree in your back yard? Well, there’s that Home Depot on Rhode Island Avenue, otherwise you’re headed for the suburbs. Yes, all these are true. But the difference is that no law prohibits the sale of golf clubs in DC. Presumably, that lack exists because of market conditions, not an affirmative prohibition by legislation. > [@](#): > > So explain to me why firearms instructors operating out of their house is a significant concern, when it is also perfectly legal to buy a firearm from someone operating out of their house. If you do not wish to do business with someone giving firearms safety lessons or selling guns out of their house, you are free not to do that. And guess what: she didn’t have to go to someone’s house for the instruction. It seems to me that the quoted paragraph from Ms. Miller laid out her concern fairly clearly: > [@](#): > > As a woman facing the prospect of going alone to this class in neighboring states of Virginia or Maryland, I’d like to find someone who seems legit. The way I see it, I’m calling a strange man and saying, “I’m unarmed. I know you are armed. And yes, I’d like to meet you in a strange place.” Feeling safe is the reason I want the gun in the first place. You’re right that as a general rule, you are free to eschew doing business with someone working out of their home. But in this case, the city is requiring she do the training in order to permit her to exercise her right to possess a firearm in her home. So it’s not merely a choice – her objection is that the city simultaneously requires the class and the class is offered in potentially unsafe conditions. > [@](#): > > I think the idea that the government is obliged to keep updated business records on who offers what services that you are seeking is silly. I’ve had several occasions to find an FAA medical examiner, and guess what: I’m sure the FAA made a responsible effort to keep its list of physicians up to date, but it still took me a few phone calls to make an appointment. Plus, if I called up the FAA and asked them how much the doctors would charge for a Class III medical evaluation, do you think the FAA would have told me? Ms. Miller complains that the MPD were not willing to tell her how much the firearms instructors will charge her. That’s another silly complaint of hers. I appreciate your effort to refocus the discussion on another complaint, but perhaps we could finish this one. > [@](#): > > The fact that Emily Miller claims that it took her more than a week – and then ultimately signed up for a class with someone not even on that list and everything worked out fine – once again indicates she is probably not capable of intermediate-level life skills. What, specifically, should she have done differently? ---
**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, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/23 "2014-07-30T21:48:04Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I understand that the heart of the matter here is that the DC government did not allow such instruction, but as a practical matter, a DC resident complaining that they can’t have various services within city limits falls on deaf ears with me. Want to go to an airport? Oh my gosh, you have to leave DC. Want to buy a new car? Either you buy a VW or you have to go to Maryland or Virginia. Want to buy golf clubs? I don’t think you can actually buy a set of irons anywhere in DC anymore. Want to play paintball? Yep, out of luck. How about if you want to plant a tree in your back yard? Well, there’s that Home Depot on Rhode Island Avenue, otherwise you’re headed for the suburbs. > > The idea that life in DC sometimes involves trips to the suburbs to do things is like saying that it can be warm here in July. No kidding, Sherlock. Your examples are not on point since none implicate enumerated fundamental constitutional rights. The problem is that DC required a certain thing as a pre-requisite to obtaining a firearm, then prohibited that thing within its jurisdiction. While this is a different jurisdiction, this specific tactic was addressed in Ezell v. Chicago. Chicago required live fire training before allowing firearm purchase, then proceeded to ban all live fire ranges within the city. Chicago was sued and prevailed at the district level, but was ultimately reversed at the federal appellate level. From that [opinion](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1573261.html): > [@](#): > > The City’s misplaced focus on the availability of firing ranges outside the city also infected the district court’s evaluation of irreparable harm. The judge’s primary reason for rejecting the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction was that they had “failed to establish the irreparable harm they have suffered by requiring them to travel outside of the [c]ity’s borders to obtain their firing[-]range permits.” The judge thus framed the relevant harm as strictly limited to incidental travel burdens associated with satisfying the Ordinance’s range-training requirement. The judge noted that for at least some—perhaps many—Chicago residents, complying with the range-training requirement did not appear to pose much of a hardship at all. She observed that it might actually be easier for some Chicagoans to travel to a firing range in the suburbs than to one located, say, at the opposite end of the city if ranges were permitted to locate within city limits. The judge thought it significant that none of the individual plaintiffs had “testif[ied] that s/he was unable to travel outside of the [c]ity’s borders to obtain the one-hour range training and all three have shown that they are capable of doing so and have done so in the past .” The court held that although the Ordinance may force the plaintiffs to travel longer distances to use a firing range, this was a “quantifiable expense that can be easily calculated as damages.” > > This reasoning assumes that the harm to a constitutional right is measured by the extent to which it can be exercised in another jurisdiction. That’s a profoundly mistaken assumption. In the First Amendment context, the Supreme Court long ago made it clear that “ ‘one is not to have the exercise of his liberty of expression in appropriate places abridged on the plea that it may be exercised in some other place.’ “ Schad v. Borough of Mt. Ephraim, 452 U.S. 61, 76–77, 101 S.Ct. 2176, 68 L.Ed.2d 671 (1981) (quoting Schneider v. State of New Jersey, 308 U.S. 147, 163, 60 S.Ct. 146, 84 L.Ed. 155 (1939)). The same principle applies here. It’s hard to imagine anyone suggesting that Chicago may prohibit the exercise of a freespeech or religious-liberty right within its borders on the rationale that those rights may be freely enjoyed in the suburbs. That sort of argument should be no less unimaginable in the Second Amendment context. If litigated, I would expect a similar outcome in DC. This was also a Gura and SAF case. I am sure they are grateful for the attorney fees. ---
**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 31, 2014, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/24 "2014-07-31T01:03:44Z")
In 2011, when DC’s only gun dealer lost his lease due to rising rents, the city offered him a lease in the police headquarters. They charged him $100 a month. He was reportedly handling about 6-10 gun sales per month. Just how many gun dealers do you expect the market to support in a city with 5-10 gun sales per month? It’s a city of 600,000, mostly liberals who support strict gun laws. My point in raising the fact that DC residents do lots of things in the suburbs isn’t a commentary on the fact that it is a routine part of life here to go to Virginia or Maryland to shop, regardless of the constitutional protections of what you’re shopping for. And I have to ask: if you are standing in Union Station, just four blocks from the Capitol, it will take you 14 minutes on a Red Line train, and then an 8 minute walk, to get to a gun dealer in Silver Spring that’s about a half mile outside of DC limits. The trip will cost you $2.70. Did Ms Miller not have google when she wrote that article talking about how difficult it is to reach a gun shop? Maybe I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt and say that she simply didn’t know that a gun store has been in business for 60 years just steps from a public transportation hub. If DC had decided to persist in running all gun dealers out of DC, and put gun ownership in a catch 22 due to Federal laws requiring interstate transfers through an FFL, I agree that would be unfair. But it just seems like there isn’t a very big market for legal gun purchases here to begin with, and the government is now actually subsidizing the one guy who wants to do business in the city. What more do you expect DC to do? ---
**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 31, 2014, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/25 "2014-07-31T01:22:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You’re right that as a general rule, you are free to eschew doing business with someone working out of their home. But in this case, the city is requiring she do the training in order to permit her to exercise her right to possess a firearm in her home. So it’s not merely a choice – her objection is that the city simultaneously requires the class and the class is offered in potentially unsafe conditions. Out of a list of 47 instructors, how many do you reckon were “potentially unsafe?” How many of those instructors do you believe must meet Ms Miller’s subjective standard of safety in order to meet your own concept of fairness (if not constitutionality)? > [@](#): > > I appreciate your effort to refocus the discussion on another complaint, but perhaps we could finish this one. You miss the point. Just how much assistance is the government obligated to give someone to assist them in engaging in commerce? Clearly you think that it is insufficient for the government to require gun classes and the rely on someone’s initiative to use Google or the yellow pages. It seems you think it is insufficient to provide a list of 47 instructors if phone calls to some of them roll over to voicemail or, god forbid, someone is scared that an American is running a business out of their home. (And how rational do you believe it is for a bad guy to open a firearm training business, go through a criminal background check, advertise their business with the police department, only to assault or rob their customers referred to them by the police department? Pardon me, but don’t you have to be pretty damn stupid to think this is a rational fear?) > [@](#): > > What, specifically, should she have done differently? I struggle to find the precise course of action that fully details the principle that she should have acted like a grownup who can solve rudimentary life challenges in which a nanny state government is not expected to literally hold your hand through rather simple bureaucratic processes. Being able to read and understand directions written in pamphlets is also helpful. Not treating people with contempt - such as when she expected Sykes to make time for her when it is perfectly clear that he works by appointment only - is also helpful. Not being a journalist for a crappy newspaper with low journalistic standards, with a political agenda and financial incentive to make the process seem extraordinarily onerous no matter how minor an issue may be, would also be a positive development. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/26 "2014-07-31T02:13:12Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Out of a list of 47 instructors, how many do you reckon were “potentially unsafe?” How many of those instructors do you believe must meet Ms Miller’s subjective standard of safety in order to meet your own concept of fairness (if not constitutionality)? I have no way of knowing – I suspect, given the number of gun folks who do things as a hobby/second job, more than half. > [@](#): > > You miss the point. Just how much assistance is the government obligated to give someone to assist them in engaging in commerce? “Engaging in commerce” in general? Not much, if any. “Engaging in commerce” which the government mandates, and which it has crippled through onerous legislation – i.e., forbidding the lessons in DC territory? A lot. Specifically, since they mandated at the time a particular instructor certification, they should maintain up-to-date lists of those possessing that certification. > [@](#): > > Clearly you think that it is insufficient for the government to require gun classes and the rely on someone’s initiative to use Google or the yellow pages. Not always. In Virginia, it’s perfectly fine – because Virginia does not make it illegal to teach the very gun glasses it requires. > [@](#): > > It seems you think it is insufficient to provide a list of 47 instructors if phone calls to some of them roll over to voicemail or, god forbid, someone is scared that an American is running a business out of their home. (And how rational do you believe it is for a bad guy to open a firearm training business, go through a criminal background check, advertise their business with the police department, only to assault or rob their customers referred to them by the police department? Pardon me, but don’t you have to be pretty damn stupid to think this is a rational fear?) Because you are a liberal, I suspect you would not offer a similar opinion about a woman worried about being required to visit the home of a man unknown to her in _virtually any other circumstances_. > [@](#): > > I struggle to find the precise course of action that fully details the principle that she should have acted like a grownup who can solve rudimentary life challenges in which a nanny state government is not expected to literally hold your hand through rather simple bureaucratic processes. Being able to read and understand directions written in pamphlets is also helpful. Not treating people with contempt - such as when she expected Sykes to make time for her when it is perfectly clear that he works by appointment only - is also helpful. Not being a journalist for a crappy newspaper with low journalistic standards, with a political agenda and financial incentive to make the process seem extraordinarily onerous no matter how minor an issue may be, would also be a positive development. No, her ire stems from the fact these are not “simple” bureaucratic processes. These were processes that were designed without any interest in efficiency. Once again, though, I will highlight your effort to turn the conversation away from her complaint about this issue and on to safer ground like her employer. It’s true that she has an agenda. But it’s also true that DC had the most restrictive gun laws in the entire nation. So her effort to paint DC’s gun laws as extra-restrictive doesn’t need any exaggeration: they WERE extra-restrictive. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/27 "2014-07-31T03:20:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > “Engaging in commerce” in general? Not much, if any. > > “Engaging in commerce” which the government mandates, and which it has crippled through onerous legislation – i.e., forbidding the lessons in DC territory? > > A lot. Specifically, since they mandated at the time a particular instructor certification, they should maintain up-to-date lists of those possessing that certification. I’m inclined to agree - this rather cursory (if not useless) list the government provides to obtain services they have decided to make mandatory for the obvious sake of creating difficulty for citizens is a sign of intrusive if not abusive regulation, more so than serving any likely public-safety purpose. Of course, I’m curious what would happen if the laws in DC were reduced to the level of, say, Virginia - would gun dealers and instructors set up shop in D.C.? Is the demand for legal handguns sufficiently high in the District for anyone to set up shop in the face of risking being re-regulated out of business? ---
**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, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/28 "2014-07-31T04:07:13Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > In 2011, when DC’s only gun dealer lost his lease due to rising rents, the city offered him a lease in the police headquarters. They charged him $100 a month. He was reportedly handling about 6-10 gun sales per month. > > Just how many gun dealers do you expect the market to support in a city with 5-10 gun sales per month? It’s a city of 600,000, mostly liberals who support strict gun laws. So in 2011, he handles 5-10 gun sales/month and in the time since Heller there have been over 3000 handgun registrations… How does that happen? > [@](#): > > If DC had decided to persist in running all gun dealers out of DC, and put gun ownership in a catch 22 due to Federal laws requiring interstate transfers through an FFL, I agree that would be unfair. But it just seems like there isn’t a very big market for legal gun purchases here to begin with, and the government is now actually subsidizing the one guy who wants to do business in the city. What more do you expect DC to do? A $125 transfer fee is much higher than what you would have with competition. Let me open a gun store across the street from a police station somewhere in northwest and I could get investors for that store by the time school starts (you know for the back to school sales 🙂 ). ---
**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, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/29 "2014-07-31T04:13:12Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’m inclined to agree - this rather cursory (if not useless) list the government provides to obtain services they have decided to make mandatory for the obvious sake of creating difficulty for citizens is a sign of intrusive if not abusive regulation, more so than serving any likely public-safety purpose. > > Of course, I’m curious what would happen if the laws in DC were reduced to the level of, say, Virginia - would gun dealers and instructors set up shop in D.C.? Is the demand for legal handguns sufficiently high in the District for anyone to set up shop in the face of risking being re-regulated out of business? I think so. There are 600,000 people in DC. About half the city lives in NW, there is money there. Federal FFLs don’t need brick and mortar licenses and frequently just take orders and then shop around for the best deal they can from the various wholesalers. ---
**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 31, 2014, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/30 "2014-07-31T13:04:35Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > So in 2011, he handles 5-10 gun sales/month and in the time since Heller there have been over 3000 handgun registrations… How does that happen? I’ve never seen that statistic before. How many of those 3,000 registrations were new purchases? For example, Mr. Heller registered two pistols he owned but kept in Maryland. I know a couple other DCians who have done the same. If you know how many of those 3,000 are new purchases, I’d be interested to learn that. > [@](#): > > A $125 transfer fee is much higher than what you would have with competition. Let me open a gun store across the street from a police station somewhere in northwest and I could get investors for that store by the time school starts (you know for the back to school sales 🙂 ). As I just posted in the other thread, [it looks like](http://www.scribd.com/doc/59613668/Allowed-Firearm-Sale-Areas) the zoning regulations allow you to open a gun shop on Indiana Avenue, right next to the DC government buildings and courthouses and across the street from the existing FFL dealer. I wish you the best on your business endeavors! ---
**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 31, 2014, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/31 "2014-07-31T15:21:09Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > If DC had decided to persist in running all gun dealers out of DC, and put gun ownership in a catch 22 due to Federal laws requiring interstate transfers through an FFL, I agree that would be unfair. But it just seems like there isn’t a very big market for legal gun purchases here to begin with, and the government is now actually subsidizing the one guy who wants to do business in the city. What more do you expect DC to do? Are you contending that decades of prohibition didn’t have an impact on both the supply and demand for firearms? Regardless of the current level in DC it is not a stretch to say that the laws previously struck down and those that have been recently changed impacted supply and demand. “You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘you are free to compete with all the others,’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.” ---
**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 31, 2014, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/32 "2014-07-31T15:40:25Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Are you contending that decades of prohibition didn’t have an impact on both the supply and demand for firearms? Regardless of the current level in DC it is not a stretch to say that the laws previously struck down and those that have been recently changed impacted supply and demand. You’re free to provide evidence that generations worth of oppression has crippled the free market of guns. Knock yourself out. ---
**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 31, 2014, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/33 "2014-07-31T15:45:05Z")
3000 gun registrations as noted above with zero before 2008. That’s ample evidence. DC had no free market for gun purchases. They had a complete prohibition on handgun purchases. ---
**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 31, 2014, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/34 "2014-07-31T15:59:17Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > 3000 gun registrations as noted above with zero before 2008. That’s ample evidence. > > DC had no free market for gun purchases. They had a complete prohibition on handgun purchases. You’re aware that a registration is not the same thing as a sale, right? You’re saying that years of prohibition has altered supply and demand. 3,000 registrations is not evidence that there would have been 3,000 guns sold in DC had there been a gun shop open the last few years. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if a lot of those guns were simply transferred from storage outside of DC, without being new purchases. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/35 "2014-07-31T16:20:08Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > You’re aware that a registration is not the same thing as a sale, right? > > You’re saying that years of prohibition has altered supply and demand. 3,000 registrations is not evidence that there would have been 3,000 guns sold in DC had there been a gun shop open the last few years. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if a lot of those guns were simply transferred from storage outside of DC, without being new purchases. Does it suggest to you that SOME guns would have been sold? It seems pretty …er…myopic to suggest that 3,000 registrations means nothing at all. ---
**Author:** ![dba\_Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@dba\_Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dba_Fred)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/36 "2014-07-31T16:25:43Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Just slightly less ludicrous than her feeling unsafe in the parking lot of a gun shop. > > Guess what - the DC DMV probably hands out a list of driving instructors, and I’ll bet you anything that not all of them are located in the Tysons Corner upscale shopping mall. > > If I give you a list of 47 possible vendors for a service, you’re free to choose one that comports with your preferences, including their location. The idea that if any of them operate a business out of their house (and is it no longer true that many Federally-licensed firearms dealers also do not have a storefront business?) brings the whole list under suspicion is just more evidence that she’s a first-class dolt who is looking for things to complain about. So it’s okay with you if they set up DC’s polling places at the 47 locations outside of the District, some of which are in the basement of private individuals’ residences? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/37 "2014-07-31T16:35:47Z")
> [@dba\_Fred](#): > > So it’s okay with you if they set up DC’s polling places at the 47 locations outside of the District, some of which are in the basement of private individuals’ residences? I got a funny feeling that the rules for what counts as “onerous” will change when the constitutional right changes. Forget voting: what if we told someone they can’t write for publication without a writer’s license, subject to these same restrictions? I am certain **Ravenman** ’s _sang-froid_ would evaporate. ---
**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 31, 2014, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/38 "2014-07-31T16:47:28Z")
> [@dba\_Fred](#): > > So it’s okay with you if they set up DC’s polling places at the 47 locations outside of the District, some of which are in the basement of private individuals’ residences? Why don’t I ask you an equally stupid question: does the Second Amendment require that every American have gun stores as close to their house as close as their local polling place? I would hazard to guess that most polling places are within, say, a 10 minute walk of a person’s house. Does that mean that everyone must have a gun store (or firearms training center) also within a 10 minute walk of their house? Why not? > [@Bricker](#): > > I got a funny feeling that the rules for what counts as “onerous” will change when the constitutional right changes. > > Forget voting: what if we told someone they can’t write for publication without a writer’s license, subject to these same restrictions? I am certain **Ravenman** ’s _sang froid_ would evaporate. You get upset if I raise “extraneous” issues, and now you start talking about writer’s licenses? Physician, health thyself! Let’s just look at what the courts have had to say about whether DC’s current gun laws are too onerous and unconstitutional: [This judge says they aren’t.](http://media.washtimes.com/media/misc/2014/05/15/heller-ii-decision.pdf) ---
**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 31, 2014, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/39 "2014-07-31T16:56:39Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does it suggest to you that SOME guns would have been sold? It seems pretty …er…myopic to suggest that 3,000 registrations means nothing at all. Literally the only thing I can find on the topic is that Mr. Sykes handles about 10 or so registrations a month. My assumption is that these registrations do actually correspond with gun sales, because other people – including Mr. Heller – who owned handguns stored elsewhere did not have to sell them to themselves through Mr. Sykes in order to register them. They just had to bring the gun to the police department. So let’s say that Sykes is involved in 18 handgun sales each month. No, let’s say 25 - let’s really give you the benefit of the doubt. That means that since the new laws went into effect, he probably has been involved in fewer than half of the registrations that have been claimed (25 times 12 months times 5(ish) years equals 1,500 registrations out of 3,000 claimed). If we are more conservative and take that 10 per month more at face value, he may have processed as few as 600 gun sales over the last several years. Either way, I think my point holds: it doesn’t seem like there is a very large market for legal handguns in DC. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237/40 "2014-07-31T17:20:12Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Why don’t I ask you an equally stupid question: does the Second Amendment require that every American have gun stores as close to their house as close as their local polling place? I would hazard to guess that most polling places are within, say, a 10 minute walk of a person’s house. Does that mean that everyone must have a gun store (or firearms training center) also within a 10 minute walk of their house? Why not? > > You get upset if I raise “extraneous” issues, and now you start talking about writer’s licenses? Physician, health thyself! That’s fair – although in my defense I was responding to another poster’s comment, rather than raising the issue myself. But your point is well-taken; the issue is not voting. Or “speech licenses.” > [@](#): > > Let’s just look at what the courts have had to say about whether DC’s current gun laws are too onerous and unconstitutional: [This judge says they aren’t.](http://media.washtimes.com/media/misc/2014/05/15/heller-ii-decision.pdf) True. Of course, the US District Court for the District of Columbia also found that Dick Heller had no right to possess a handgun in his home, a view that was rebuked by the US Supreme Court. Since the US District Court sets no precedent in its rulings, I’d say that a more final ruling would be more persuasive. And, indeed, I expect that Mr. Heller will be involved in seeing that come about. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palmer-vs-dc-right-to-bear-arms/694237.md?page=3)