MAY 15, 2014 
                                                      Washington, D.C.

A United States District Court judge released a decision in which he summarily rejected the list of challenges to DC’s firearms restrictions and infringements raised in the  Heller-II  lawsuit.

The court finds the District’s tough gun registration laws and the gun control regulations passed in response to the 2008  D.C.  vs.  HELLER  landmark Supreme Court decision  do  “pass constitutional scrutiny.”  “The city has crafted their gun controls in a constitutionally permissible manner,” U.S. District Judge James  Boasberg wrote in an opinion likely to be appealed.

 One of the issues in the suit was the defense of AR-15’s.  Several states now make possession of “the common use gun of the day”  (Justice Scalia),  the AR-15, a felony.

 That decision continues a trend of some federal courts that refuse to fully recognize the Constitutional  command that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

[ excerpts from:   WashingtonPost.com ]

[See next section  below for the original   HELLER-II   challange list.]
HELLER – II (a)                   Filed:  July 28th, 2008
Docket no. 08-1289, before District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina


1.  Registration       (for future confiscation. Criminal Penalties for failure)  +

2.  3 year re-Registration requirement 

3.  6 year FBI Fingerprint & Background check +                            < eliminated >

4.  Fees – whimsical & intimidating

5.  AR-15 – outlawed   …  along with all “ugly guns”

6.  Mag Limitation to 10 rounds – all firearms

7.  Ballistics fingerprint all handguns
 (found to useless everywhere else) …                                               < eliminated >

8.  CAL / MD / CONN   Lists   —  these  limit  product  choices &  availability

9.  Limit – 1 firearm per month purchase

10.  Driver-License Vision required  —  So Sorry, GranDad …        < eliminated >

11.  Carry Ownership PAPERS at all times with firearm,  Comrade.

12.  UZI name – Totally outlawed, on anything

13.  4 hrs. Classroom training +                                             <  replaced with a  20 min. Safety video >

14.  One Hour range time (No resistance on these – Safety First)

15.  Notify Police Chief of any change of disposition   (loss, sale, theft)  +

16.  Running dialogue with Police Chief of changing uses   (biz – home – movement) of H/G

FEBRUARY 29, 2012        Washington Post

D.C. City Council on the Judiciary panel agrees to discard some gun rules…

(a)   the vision test,
(b)   ballistics testing on handguns,  < MD & Can. Mounties 10 yrs Never solved 1 case>
(c)   FBI fingerprint / background check every six years,
(d)   five-hour training course including an hour of range time, and
(e)   the ban on ammo for guns resident does not have registered.
        ( the ammo sentence is a year in jail, more than having an un-registered gun !!)

     (mod. 1/12/2013)

December 10, 2013

EMILY MILLER:    Dick Heller challenges D.C.’s gun registration
                                                       scheme,  files for quick ruling in Heller II

The Washington Times
The District of Columbia will do anything to stop law-abiding people from owning firearms to defend themselves.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that D.C.’s 30-year handgun ban was unconstitutional in the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller decision. In response, Washington’s city council put in place the most onerous gun registration requirement in the country. 
So Dick Heller is taking D.C. to court again in a case known as “Heller II.”
Heller told me in a phone interview Tuesday that, “The city collected every gun restriction they could find from every other state and gave them to us as thumbtacks on the road for our march to Second Amendment freedom.”
He is the lead plaintiff of five District residents who state that their constitutional rights are being infringed by the registration requirements. The city claims the process is necessary for “to protect police officers and to aid in crime control.”
On Tuesday evening  [Dec. 10,  Dick Heller’s birthday], 
the plaintiffs’ attorneys, Stephen Halbrook and Dan Peterson filed a motion in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia asking Judge James Boasberg for summary judgment. They also asked for denial of the city’s request for summary judgment last month.
The plaintiffs argue in the brief that, “These burdensome requirements appear calculated to discourage persons from registering firearms at all and, for those who do so, to snare them with expiration and re-registration deadlines that, if missed, would turn them into criminals.”
The re-registration requirement starts on Jan. 1. Every gun owners who has registered a gun since 1976 will have to go to police headquarters to be fingerprinted and photographed.
In Oct. 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the concept of what it called the “basic” registration of handguns, but not a requirement for long guns, which it termed “novel,  not historic.”  And the court questioned whether any registration of rifles and shotguns is constitutional.
Long guns are rarely used in crimes. Rifles and shotguns were the murder weapon in only three cases in the most recent three years of available data in D.C.
To put that in context, there were 96 homicides committed with things other than guns, like knives or fists, in that same time period.
Also, the appeals court remanded other issues back to the District Court to decide, such as the requirements that applicants appear in person at the police station to be fingerprinted and photographed, re-register their guns every three years, take a safety course and prove a knowledge of firearms on a written test.
The central points made in the plaintiffs’ 50-page brief are that law-abiding people are the only ones registering their guns, and that the process does not make the city any safer.
“Even if a simple registration requirement for handguns passes constitutional muster, the District’s complex procedures do not,” the lawyers wrote. “No State imposes requirements as onerous as the District’s.”
New facts on police activity and crime statistics are revealed from depositions with Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier and the officers who oversee the Firearms Registration Section.
Lt. Jon Shelton revealed that there were only two handgun applications denied by his office in 2011 and 2012. Not a single rifle or shotgun application was refused.
The criminals just aren’t stopping by police headquarters to get fingerprinted and photographed before hitting the streets.
Meanwhile, the police recovered 12,000 unregistered firearms from 2007 to 2013.
Officers only found 36 registered guns in that same six-year period. Even then, only 17 of the those firearms were involved in charges against the registered firearm owner, and only two resulted in convictions of that person for a violent crime.
Furthermore, the police also aren’t using the registration records to solve crimes. “Lt. Shelton cannot recall any specific instance where registration records were used to determine who committed a crime,” except for possession offenses,” the plaintiffs wrote.
Contrary to previous assertions that registration is “critical” to police safety, the plaintiffs’ brief uncovers the truth that officers do not have access to registration records before responding to calls.  [which belies the city claims that registration makes the city and the police safer ~ dh . . . ]
“D.C. maintained for years that guns must be registered so that police officers will know whether a gun is present when they respond to a call,” Mr. Halbrook told me. 
“Yet no good cop would assume that criminals register guns.  Now we know that D.C. police don’t check the gun registry when on the way to a crime scene, and the reason for registration collapses.”
Coincidentally, the appeals decision came down just one day before I walked into the Metropolitan Police Department and started a four-month odyssey to register a gun for the first time.
In the two years since, it has become clear that a 17-step registration mandate exists solely to dissuade law-abiding people from exercising their Second Amendment rights.
The registration process in D.C. has resulted in the good guys having their rights infringed, while the bad guys have a field day.
The courts should rule that it is unconstitutional. Mr. Heller plans to appeal until they do.
                              Emily Miller  is senior editor of opinion for The Washington Times and
                                                author of “Emily Gets Her Gun” (Regnery, 2013).


JUNE 29, 2012

Presiding Judge Urbina retired recently and the  HELLER-2  case is
pending assignment to a new judge.  

Meanwhile,  after the case was remanded from  Fed. Court of Appeals  [D.C. Circuit]  back to the the U.S. Fed. District Court we filed a motion to move the case forward. 

Judge Urbina never acted on the motion, 
perhaps because DC announced it was revising the ordinance. 

DC then had committee hearings, 
finally passed the emergency act,  and then passed the permanent act which is now pending congressional review. 

In light of the changed law,
we are finalizing an amended complaint and are including some additional plaintiffs. 
In addition to a couple of other new plaintiffs, we are searching for a blind person to serve as a plaintiff. 
So this is all taking time, but we are in it for the long haul. 
The next notice should be when the amended complaint is ready.


Washington Post… D.C. City Council on the Judiciary panel agrees to discard some gun rules…
(a)   the vision test,
(b)   ballistics testing on handguns,
(c)   FBI fingerprint / background check every six years,
(d)   five-hour training course including an hour of range time, and
(e)   the ban on ammo for guns resident does not have registered.
        ( the ammo sentence is a year in jail, more than having an un-registered gun !!)

The City Council body takes a vote in April.
~ ~ Tim Craig
                                                                    # #

                                       We are currently awaiting for the 
                                 Discovery response from the D.C. Court.

                                    The city has imposed the myriad gun control laws 
                                              with the reasoning … “because it’s safer,”

        The statist have added a new phrase to their lexicon of phony excuses to justify the  encroachment  of our Constitutional Rights & Freedoms.   To the standard mantra . . .  “for the children,”  and  , , , “for the greater good,” . . . they have added the nonsense of . . . “because it’s safer,”  . . . to justify every new gun control law.
the court has  instructed  that the D.C. City Council make their nonsense transparant by formally justifying each of the   post-Heller-1   imposed  regulations &  restrictions,  all of which infringe on the Second Amendment rights of the responsible citizens of D.C.   They are instructed to reveal their  measurable &  defendable data  to the court and  justify how it makes the world  “safer.”
This will be “Mission Impossible” for them since FBI data presented to Congress shows that the nonsense of the 1976 gun ban  created a D.C. murder rate 10 times the national average (for comperable sized cities) and earned it the title of  “Murder Capitol of America.”  


Pressures have again been brought to bear on the D.C. City Council for it’s insistence on  infringing  &  nonsensical  gun control laws.  Just like the  legal  challenges  & the  peer  snickerings  after the Heller-1 case forced the city to abandon it’s non-sense idea of  labeling all  Semi-Auto  handguns  as machine guns,  the same forces seem to be impacting the outcome of the current Heller-2 case.
The D.C. City Council had previously created a law making it illegal to even handle a firearm until it was  “properly registered”  yet, it could  not be  registered  until it was  handled — in a required safety course.  In olden days,  this idiocy or intentional stepping on citizens’ rights,  would have earned them more than a mere “tar and feathering and run ’em out of town.”. . . .A bill submitted 12/5/2011 to the city council & will more than likely pass would:
Loosen the handling / Training / registering procedures,
Scrap the Vision test,
( Senior Citizens can own again.),
Eliminate the requirements for the Ballistic test,
( Found to be a useless waste of taxpayer funds by both
the MD State Police and the Canadian Mounted Police after 10 years —
not one crime ever solved with it), and
4.     [Note:  this one is not well documented, yet.]
Require registration only for the first firearm purchased, not any subsequent ones.
( Thereby maintaining the current gun owner data base or possibly this could be the forerunner of requiring the “Responsible Citizen” to carry a “Hand Gun Permit” but not requiring criminals to carry a criminal I. D. !! — So who is being treated like a criminal here ? ) 
WARNING:  History shows that  ANY  Registration  Eventually  (always)  leads to Confiscation.More posting as Intel provides . . . DH

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

of  Oct. 4,  2011

The  Heller – 2  decision has generated setbacks, albeit temporary, 
                                on 3 issues.

The Appeals Court upheld the DC laws on :

1.     AR-15 style so-called “Assault Weapons remain banned,”

2.    Ban on 11-plus size ammo magazines,

3.    Registration process, for Handguns only, which requires too much
         detailed information on both the owner & the firearm.  All of these
         issues will be challanged higher up at a later date.

The following have been remanded or sent back to the original trial judge for
re-evaluation and to apply the standard of  Intermediate Scrutiny :
1.  ALL of the registration requirements that have been applied to long guns,
2.  All of the following registration requirements applying to long guns and handguns,
a.   Demonstrate knowledge of D.C. firearms laws,
b.   Vision better than or equal to that required to obtain a driver’s license,
c.   Training, including 1 hour firing range, 4 hours class,
d.   Pistol ballistics test & fees,
e.   Ban on registering more than 1 handgun in 30 days,
f.    Fingerprints (like a criminal),  photograph,  application in person, & bring firearm,
g.   Registration expiration every 3 years, renewal required, & forgetting criminalizes the owner.
There is reason for Optimism  –  of the 3-judge panel,  Judge Kavanaugh dissented and
would have found everything to be an unconstitutional infringment.

He brings  Text,  History, &  Tradition from Justice Scalia’s Heller-I decision to Heller-II.
Reading his dissent will give Elation to everyone laboring under Infringments from New York
to California.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Heller II  Court  Results:

The  Fed. Appeals Court ruling on the Dick Heller – II  Decision  is Expected  in  summer  of  2011.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Do  2nd Amendment Rights  have a  TERMINATION  date ?

The D.C. govt requires a  Re-registration  of  each  handgun every three years.  Failure to do so converts an owner to the status of a criminal with loss of  Second Amendment Rights.  I know of no  Fundamental, Enumerated, Constitutional  Right  having an  expiration  date !

Send the equivalent of a couple boxes of bullets to keep fighting for all our Rights.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

HELLER II in court:

November 15, 2010

Case: 10-7036 Document: 1241254

Filed: 04/22/2010

SHORT Version
of the issues in the HELLER II case before the Appellate Court & being heard on Monday, 19 Nov. 2010 is as follows:

Whether the DC court should have applied  STRICT SCRUTINY  to determine validity of the DC GUN REGISTRATION Act.

Whether DC GUN REGISTRATION violates the Second Amendment.

Whether the  “ASSAULT WEAPONS” BAN  violates the Second Amendment.

Whether the “LARGE CAPACITY MAGAZINE” BAN violates the Second Amendment.

Whether the “ASSAULT WEAPONS” BAN and the
“LARGE CAPACITY MAGAZINE” BAN  are even authorized by
D.C. Code § 1-303.43.


On March 26, 2010,

Judge Ricardo Urbina of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the D.C. firearm ordinances enacted after the Supreme Court’s D.C. v. Heller decision in 2008 “permissibly regulate the exercise of the core Second  Amendment right to use firearms for the purpose of self-defense in the home.” Urbina dismissed a case brought by Dick Heller [ HELLER-2 ].

Heller challenged the District’s firearms

(a.)  registration process, its
(b.)  ban on assault weapons, and its
(c.)  prohibition of “large capacity ammunition feeding devices,”
claiming they violated the Second Amendment.

In analyzing the Supreme Court’s Heller decision, Urbina said the Second Amendment right to bear arms “is not unlimited.”  He cited Justice Antonin Scalia’s admonition that the Court’s decision, while declaring an individual right to bear arms, did not “cast doubt” on a range of firearms regulations. Urbina said he was applying  “intermediate scrutiny”  to D.C.’s new ordinances, and under that standard, he concluded the regulations were permissible because they serve the District’s “important governmental interest” in public safety.

Gun control advocates applauded the ruling as proof that the 2008 Heller decision did not sweep away all forms of firearm regulation.

Heller’s lawyer Stephen Halbrook said this afternoon the decision was disappointing, and “I’d be surprised if we don’t appeal.”

Halbrook, a Virginia lawyer and Second Amendment scholar, commented that even though Urbina said he was using an intermediate level of scrutiny in appraising the D.C. law, he was in fact  overly deferential  toward the city. “He repeated uncritically whatever the [D.C. Council] committee report said.” Halbrook also said the ultimate fate of the D.C. ordinance may depend in part on what the Supreme Court says about how fundamental the right to bear arms is in the pending case of McDonald v. City of Chicago.

123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 1234


JULY 6, 2009
Summary-Decision-Request  Court Date
For the Heller-II A & B Complaints:
Postponed until August,  Date T.B.A.
June 20, 2009


Heller – 2 (b) Lawsuit  —

D.C. Expands List Of Allowed Guns To Avert Heller Lawsuit

Filed on Wed.  3/25/2009


DC passed “emergency” legislation that illegally enforces laws
not yet passed / approved by congress, as is required by
DC Home Rule legislation . . .

After a small window of time when they could legally be registered,
the city has again begun  disallowing  the registration of  AR-15’s.


March 25, 2009

Docket no. 08-1289, before District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina

This action is to vindicate the right of the people of D.C. to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment which prohibits infringement of the right of citizens to keep commonly-possessed firearms in the home.

The newest D.C. legislation has added onerous requirements to pre-Heller law with provisions which are most unusual and are unreasonable,  have new  prohibitions on commonly-possessed firearms &  magazines, and contains unduly rigerous registration requirements  —  all which makes it far more burdensome to register a firearm of any kind in the District of Columbia.

– Limit residents to registering one handgun every 30 days,
– Require training prior to registering a firearm,
– Requires handguns to be re-registered every three years,
– Prohibit the registration of handguns that are not listed on California’s
Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale,
– Ban handguns manufactured after January 1, 2011 that
do not have microstamping technology, and
– Prohibit the registration of semi-automatic rifles.

The Police Chief will register only one handgun  (H/G)  per person each month.

Fingerprinting  (like a  CRIMINAL)  —  Long waiting period for FBI to return report.

Every 3 years firearms owners must renew their gun registration certificates.

Every 6 years a registrant must get an FBI fingerprinting/CRIMINAL background  check.

A typical person’s costs of about  $300 and a time period of over a month is required  to legally take posession of a fire arm.   Our filing contains a plaintif’s case study.


A gun owner  can lose their Second Amendment rights for failure to notify the Police Chief of any job or address change, like a
CRIMINAL  on parole.

If a registration is inadvertently not renewed, such as due to sickness or travel, gun owners are subject to criminal punishment of 5 years in jail.

A wide array of commonly-possessed handguns, rifles, & shotguns are  missing from the Cal. roster because of manufacturers’ lack of interest in paying  Listing-Fees   [another HIDDEN tax]  for their discontinued models.  This filing includes Heller’s extremely common 1970’s version of a 1911  Army Colt .45  which was  rediculously  &  WHIMSICALLY  dis-approved for this reason.

A DC resident may not possess a handgun that is not on the  WHIMSICALLY & EXTORTION-devised California Roster of  “APPROVED” Handguns.

DC  CRIMINAL-izes the ownership and possession of any H/G that is not on the California Approved Roster.

Police Chief will require all persons, with registered firearms from over 30 years ago, to   re-register   them beginning about April 2009

—  Aparently all are required to use the newest form an d to validate their employment history & other irrelevant & intrusive personal information as if they are  CRIMINALS.

Of  40,000 plus registered firearms, last year the city’s registration procedures could  not  account for  30,000 of them.

The transport of any firearm in travel outside the home must be accompanied by the piece of paper called the Registration Certificate and exhibit it upon demand by any law enforcement officer  —  “Show me your papers, comrade.”

DEFINITIONS:   “ASSAULT WEAPON,”    [ according to D.C. ]

is defined as a semi-automatic rifle that takes a   detachable magazine and  any one of the following:  a pistol grip, a thumbhole stock,
or a folding/telescoping stock.   Such rifles are commonly possessed for lawful purposes throughout the United States.

is further defined as a semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:  a threaded barrel capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer, and the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.   The former would include threading for target-style barrel weights or muzzle brakes to reduce recoil and the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

is a semi-automatic shotgun that has a detachable magazine is classified as an assault weapon.   Having a detachable magazine is a safety feature allowing for the safe  unloading of a shotgun.


Assault Weapon  —  The term assault weapon is also defined to include any firearm that the Police Chief may designate as an assault weapon by rule, based on a determination that   “the firearm”  would reasonably pose a similar danger to the health, safety, and security of the residents of the District as other weapons enumerated as assault weapons.   This empowers the Chief to ban any firearm of any kind whatever without regard to any defined feature (ugly-gun), or to ban  all  firearms simply by designating them with the label “assault weapon.”

ELIMINATE The Second Amendment  —  BY WHIM . . . like 32 years ago ! !

A person in the District in possession of any large capacity magazine (a mag accepting more than 10 rounds)  is considered to be in possession of  CRIMINAL contraband and can be punished at the same level as a first time firearms volation, punishable by a  $1,000  fine and  one year in  prison.   Officer Heller was denied the registration of his Sig Sauer P226 9mm pistol for self defense in the home because the standard magazine size is 15 rounds.


A list of   ANY  named  pistols  beginning with  “UZI,”  the first name of the famed Jewish firearm designer  Uzi Gal, and not the name of any specific model with any specific features.  The District thus purports to prohibit a firearm based solely on the  name of the designer without regard to any characteristics of the firearm.

On March 19, 2009  plaintiff  Heller  submitted an application for firearms registration  for a Baby Eagle UZI, 9mm semi-automatic pistol, for self-defense in the home.  This is an ordinary pistol similar to other 9mm pistols. By letter the Metropolitan Police notified Heller that the pistol is  un-registerable  because:  “the listed weapon is defined as an  assault weapon  and prohibited from being registered in DC,”  soley because of the  brand name.

Another case was filed this month because,  while the H/G  is on the Cal. approved list,  GREEN  was  NOT an approved  COLOR for that model.
123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 1234

July 28th, 2008
Docket no. 08-1289, before District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina

Semi-automatics labeled a machine gun   —    the city rolled over . . .
a semi-auto pistol is not a machine gun !

Trigger Locked  & unloaded  —  not practical for self defense,  city agreed

Ammo storage in another room   —   no longer necessary

Bullet count   —   remains under contest

Fees, undefined   —   under contest

Ballistics test   —   USELESS but still operative law

Ugly Guns  —  Ban remains in limbo

Dec. 16, 2008

New Laws Added:

Training requirement – Possibly OK

Reporting requirements:
Annual check in !!  —  has been eliminated
3-year registration  —  is now law
6-year FBI background check  —  is now law
Plans to adhere to the “California Gun List”  which means
no AR-15’s or “ugly” assault weapons can be registered
at some unspecified date in the future.

# #
If you were able to buy a gun after June, 2008, you can
Thank the U.S. Bill of Rights and the Heller Foundations.

The  D.C. vs. HELLER  decision brought us the  McDonald vs. Chicago
and 300 more court cases turning the tide in the favor of  FREEDOM !

Sponsorship:   Support our work with a Box  of   BULLET$  monthly.

                               Help  Us  to Protect  Your  Rights.

# #