You may remember that last month yet another gun law was passed in DC as they struggled to come into compliance with the Heller ruling, while still trying to find a way to restrict the rights of gun owners. At the time of its passage, the WaPo even noted that the new law was passed “reluctantly.” Phil Mendelson (D) (who drafted the bill along with the mayor) gave some rather blatant indications that he was trying to find a way to undercut the decision while realizing he was going to have a fight on his hands.

Mendelson said the new carry legislation is among the strictest in the nation, with the city preparing to join the likes of Maryland, New Jersey and New York in establishing a highly restrictive regime that requires applicants to state good reason to carry a weapon. But he said a flat ban was no longer constitutionally feasible.

“If it looks like we’re being cranks . . . and we don’t want anyone to get a license, we’re in trouble in court,” he said. “I do think this will survive a [legal] challenge.”

He quickly found the press on his side – once again- as they exhibited the usual hand wringing and concern trolling. If they couldn’t win immediately, they would at least need some more time (pretty please) to get ready for the wave of gun waving lunatics preparing to invade the peaceful streets of the nation’s capital.

The D.C. attorney general’s office has asked U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. to reconsider or at least stay his order that could make it legal for people to carry guns on our city’s streets. The judge has signaled a reluctance to do so, but to deny the request would be deeply irresponsible, force hasty lawmaking on a complex, sensitive public safety issue and put lives at risk…

Without a further stay, either the council will have to pass a law in less than a month or the District will have to allow the unregulated carrying of firearms on city streets until legislation is passed.

This fight is far from over, and without continued action the Second Amendment rights of DC residents and visitors is far from a given. This week Alan Gura, the attorney who originally challenged the old ban, noted that the new restrictions still failed to pass constitutional muster and vowed to continue the fight.

An attorney who successfully challenged the District of Columbia’s ban on carrying handguns outside a home says the centerpiece of new gun legislation passed by the D.C. Council is unconstitutional and that a judge should keep it from going into effect.

New legislation passed by the D.C. Council in September says a person can only get a permit to carry a gun outside their home or business if they demonstrate a specific reason for needing one. Attorney Alan Gura wrote in a court filing Tuesday that the Constitution requires the city to allow people to carry a gun for self-defense, without any more specific reason.

Gura asked a judge to act so that individuals would not need to provide a specific reason to carry a gun outside the home.

Hopefully Gura can get the courts to step in on the real substance of this case. What DC is attempting is the same thing that legislators in New York – among other places – have been getting away with for years. Simply obtaining a ruling saying that it is legal for citizens to arm themselves is not enough. If you allow the local government to then pass laws which essentially say that you are entitled to own a firearm, but only if you can show sufficient reason for needing one, is the same as allowing an outright ban if the people in charge believe that nobody has a good enough reason.

The DC council has put their cards on the table from the beginning. Their goal of not allowing anyone to carry a weapon remains the same, but now they’re just looking for the legal language to enforce the same ban while giving the appearance of obeying the Supreme Court. They need to be flushed out into the light of day and exposed.