View Single Post
Old 12-13-2013, 05:26 PM   #100
2bikemike 2bikemike is offline
Born to Ride
2bikemike's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: El Cajon Calif.
Casino cash: $15477
Originally Posted by listopencil View Post
I haven't found anything about the ongoing trial of Witasheck. It started Nov 4th. I did see an update article with not much new info, but they posted copies of the DC laws that were used and a pic for clarity:

A Law Fit For a Police State

To understand just how draconian this prohibition is, we need to look at the law itself — which is almost unbelievable to someone unfamiliar with the police state in D.C. But here it is, according to D.C. Code § 7-2506.01:
(a) No person shall possess ammunition in the District of Columbia unless:
(1) He is a licensed dealer pursuant to subchapter IV of this unit;
(2) He is an officer, agent, or employee of the District of Columbia or the United States of America, on duty and acting within the scope of his duties when possessing such ammunition; (3) He is the holder of the valid registration certificate for a firearm of the same gauge or caliber as the ammunition he possesses; except, that no such person shall possess restricted pistol bullets; or
(4) He holds an ammunition collector’s certificate on September 24, 1976.
This is one of the most oppressive ammunition laws in the country. Possessing something that arbitrary and innocuous in most parts of the USA will get a person a SWAT raid and prison time in Washington D.C. The “crime” doesn’t need to involve an actual firearm or any malicious behavior. Enforcers are exempt from the law, and anyone else must seek the district’s permission to exercise their “rights”.
But it gets worse. D.C. code has an interesting way of defining “ammunition.”
Per D.C. Code § 7-2501.01 (2), ammunition in Washington D.C. is defined as:
(2) “Ammunition” means cartridge cases, shells, projectiles (including shot), primers, bullets (including restricted pistol bullets), propellant powder, or other devices or materials designed, redesigned, or intended for use in a firearm or destructive device.
Most shooters consider “ammunition” to be the finished product of several components that is ready to be discharged. This would include a casing fitted with a primer, loaded with powder, clamped to a projectile. While a person can use basic tools to combine the components into a usable round of ammunition, the components themselves cannot be fired. For an idea of how a typical pistol round is configured, examine this diagram:

What is striking about the district’s definition is that it labels all of the separate components as “ammunition.” This means that the already-oppressive ammo ban was written in such a broad manner that it goes far beyond usable rounds of ammo. It was written to include things that couldn’t even be fired if the owner wanted to.

An empty brass casing — illegal.

A tiny BB, known as “shot” — illegal.

A piece of metal capable of being a projectile — illegal.
So does my bolded part mean that an off duty cop can't have any ammo? If so what do they do issue you a certain quantity at the start of the shift?
Posts: 14,260
2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.2bikemike is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote