search
top

Progress, But Not Nearly Enough

Washington, D.C. has issued eight concealed carry permits:

“We’ve had 69 applications, of which 3 were canceled at the request of the applicant,” Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) spokeswoman Gwendolyn Crump said. “So far eight licenses have been approved and issued.”

Completely unacceptable. They ought to be charged with contempt. But nonetheless, there are eight people in DC who have, albeit limited, carry permits. These eight are pioneers, who would never have had them without court intervention. Let’s hope these pioneers are followed by many, many others.

9 Responses to “Progress, But Not Nearly Enough”

  1. Cemetery's Gun Blob says:

    Like to find out more about these ‘civilians’….probably like NJ, they’re retired LEO’s, or armed security of some sort.

    • Sebastian says:

      I’d say likely, but I believe armed security is an exception under DC law, you just can’t take it home with you without ze right papieren.

    • Gene says:

      It is non of our business who they are. Leo, private eye or you or I.

      • Archer says:

        It’s none of Teh Distrikt’s, either, so it would be VERY interesting – and relevant – if most or all of those eight permit holders were politically or occupationally connected in ways the unwashed masses aren’t.

      • HSR47 says:

        I can certainly see where you’re coming from, and I think you’re partially right.

        I certainly agree that where permits are issued on a non-discretionary shall-issue basis that publicly identifying licensees is totally inappropriate. Still, the public likely still has the right to know basic information about those who have been granted permits, particularly basic statistical data (age, sex, income, etc.) vs the general non-prohibited population.

        In general, this data is important because it gives us a way to prove the degree to which people, especially those with lower incomes, are being disenfranchised. Remember: The people who are in favor of this kind of strict near-zero issuance of carry licenses are the SAME people who think that voter-ID laws are fundamentally unconstitutional because they disenfranchise low-income persons. If we are to use the same argument regarding carry licenses, then we MUST have this data to prove that it is actually happening.

        In jurisdictions where licenses are granted on a highly-discretionary mostly-won’t-issue basis, this data is even more critical, and for largely the same reasons. Additionally, when the policy is near-zero issuance of licenses, I believe that the public has a right to know a much larger amount of information about the specific applicants, including specific data leading to the issuance or denial of licenses.

  2. Renegade_Azzy says:

    training requirements are the new poll tax, and should be stricken from all carry laws.

  3. Erin Palette says:

    I assume that, just like Illinois, DC doesn’t recognize any permits other than its own?

  4. Brad says:

    69 applications? Considering the obstacles D.C. raised to legal possession, I’m surprised there are that many people who have their own handguns inside Washington D.C.!

    • HSR47 says:

      If memory serves, this permitting process is open to those who are not district residents.

top