Profile image
By Conservative Daily
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

Breaking! Major 2nd Amendment Victory in DC

Sunday, May 24, 2015 10:51
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

Fellow Conservative,

This is what we have been waiting for! Alan Gura and the Second Amendment Foundation won a major victory this past week in getting an injunction against Washington D.C.’s “may issue” concealed carry law.

First, let’s take a step backwards. Last year, U.S. District Judge Frederick Scullin ruled that Washington D.C.’s ban on concealed carry was unconstitutional because it violated the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

This initial victory was short lived thanks to the District passing a new law making concealed carry permits may-issue. In order to receive permission to bear arms for self defense in public, D.C. residents were forced to prove they had a “good reason” to do so. Only the politically-connected were allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.

Here at Conservative-Daily, we’ve said all along that it is called the Bill of Rights, and not the Bill of Needs, for a reason. No one is forced to prove a “good reason” to worship their religion or provide a “good reason” to be afforded a trial before a jury.

Liberals have tried to infringe on the 2nd Amendment by technically permitting concealed carry but making the requirements so arbitrary that they are impossible to meet.

Thanks to Judge Scullin’s injunction, anyone who meets the requirements for a concealed carry permit in Washington DC must be given one. They can no longer require that citizens show a “good reason” to carry a firearm.

However California, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Maryland, and Hawaii continue to force residents to prove a “good reason” or a “justifiable need” before they are allowed to defend themselves in public.

This is unacceptable! Tell Congress to take the DC ruling and apply it nationwide!

The crazy thing is that 26% of all Americans live behind enemy lines and are having their Second Amendment rights denied.

There isn’t a single right enumerated in the Bill of Rights that requires citizens to prove they need it.

Honestly, could you imagine?

“We’d be happy to let you worship your religion, but please fill out this form detailing why you need to pray…”


“The Judge is going to issue his final ruling. If you can come up with a ‘good reason’ for why you need a trial before a jury of your peers, please speak now.”


That might sound silly, but this substitute concealed carry and this is exactly the logic liberals are using to deny citizens their rights.

In New Jersey, for example, residents are forced to show a “justifiable need” and an “urgent necessity for self-protection” (as if anyone can predict when their life will be in danger…)

In Maryland, residents are forced to prove a “good and substantial reason” to exercise their Second Amendment rights to carry a firearm.

New York requires residents to show “good cause” before they are allowed to legally carry a firearm. In rural areas, this permit can be attainable. However, it is impossible for the average citizen to legally carry a firearm in New York City.

Despite the Constitution promising American citizens the right to carry a weapon, Liberal states across the country are forcing residents to prove why they need to carry. No one asked Rosa Parks why she needed to sit at the front of the bus and no one asked Oliver L. Brown why African-American children needed to attend the White schools in Topeka, Kansas.

It would be unconscionable to apply a “justifiable need” or “substantial reason” test to any other part of the Bill of Rights. Yet through our silence, we continue to allow the Democrats in Congress and the State Legislatures to violate the rights of our fellow Americans without fear of repercussion.

Spread right to carry nationwide! Urge Congress to pass the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act!

This legislation, S. 498, is simple: if someone is allowed to carry a firearm in their home state, they’re allowed to carry a firearm nationwide.

All other laws would have to be followed. Ignorance of the law would not be an excuse to break it.

But this would be an important first step in protecting the Second Amendment nationwide.

There’s no reason that this bill hasn’t been put to a vote yet. There is more than enough support to have it passed in the Senate and House. The only thing lacking is a clamoring from the public demanding it be passed.

That’s up to you! Join the choir of patriots across the country and demand that concealed carry rights be enforced nationwide!

A right delayed is a right denied! Demand that Congress protect all Americans’ 2nd Amendment rights!


Joe Otto

Conservative Daily


Report abuse


Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Total 1 comment
  • Your argument is circular, and subject to someone granting you the privilege. of what is an inalienable right…. that means that you do not have to ask anyones permission to do it. So to continue the mis-direction of asking DC to allow you to preform something that is not within their purview to grant is a load of crap.

    When you finally wake up and realize that the Constitution is to control them (the government) you will stop being subservient to them.

    for your edification:
    Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 (1886)

    While acts of a de facto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law and existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy, the acts of a person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office which does not exist de jure can have no validity whatever in law.

    An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed.

    18 USC § 2384

    Seditious conspiracy

    If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

    Just so we are clear on being charged with a alleged “Firearm” Violation what does the law say:
    26 U.S. Code § 5845

    (a) Firearm
    The term “firearm” means
    (1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
    (2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
    (3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
    (4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
    (5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e);
    (6) a machinegun;
    (7) any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code); and
    (8) a destructive device. The term “firearm” shall not include an antique firearm or any device (other than a machinegun or destructive device) which, although designed as a weapon, the Secretary finds by reason of the
    date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a collector’s item and is not likely to be used as a weapon.

    As my brother the retired LEO says its semantics, well he has not read the damn law or definition…. can any one see in the above where it says “small arms” (pistol) the definition is the same in Title 18 and 27.

Top Stories
Recent Stories



Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.