This is outrageous — the fascist police chief of Washington D.C., Cathy Lanier
June 27th, 2008 by Syd
Action Alert: Washington DC Already Planning To Restrict Law-Abiding Citizens 2nd Amendment Rights
The following is a memo sent to Washington, DC residents by Cathy Lanier, Washington, DC Chief of Police:
From: Lanier, Cathy (MPD)
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 6:35 PM
Subject: Supreme Court Update
Residents,
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court today struck down part of the District of Columbia’s handgun ban. I wanted to drop you a note to let you know the immediate impact of this decision.
The Supreme Court’s ruling is limited and leaves intact various other laws that apply to private residents who would purchase handguns or other firearms for home possession. It is important that everyone know that:
- a.. First, all firearms must be registered with the Metropolitan Police Department’s Firearms Registration Section before they may be lawfully possessed.
a.. Second, automatic and semiautomatic handguns generally remain illegal and may not be registered.
a.. Third, the Supreme Court’s ruling is limited to handguns in the home and does not entitle anyone to carry firearms outside his or her own home.
Lastly, although the Court struck the safe storage provision on the ground that it was too broadly written, in my opinion firearms in the home should be kept either unloaded and disassembled or locked.
I will comply with the Court’s reading of the Second Amendment in its letter and spirit. At the same time, I will continue to vigorously enforce the District’s other gun-related laws. I will also continue to find additional ways to protect the District’s residents against the scourge of gun violence.
Residents who want additional information can visit the Metropolitan Police Website at www.mpdc.dc.gov/gunregistration. Residents with questions are encouraged to contact the Firearms Registration Section at 202-727-9490.
Sncerely,
Cathy Lanier
Chief of Police
Memo Source: WashingtonPost.com
When you require such restrictions on your Officers, I might begin to think you have the best interest of the people in mind. As it stands, you continue to pursue PROVEN methods of failure.
In EVERY case where restrictions were eased on firearms, the crime rate has dropped.
At the very seat our country, we have a repressive regime who would disarm the VERY people they are supposed to serve.
As a role model, you’ve failed miserably.
geoff beneze
geoffb@beast-enterprises.com
Ms Lanier,
That someone who so signally fails to understand the basic rights of our citizens should rise to the position of Chief of Police in a major metropolitan area is a scathing indictment of both you and of the system which permits such a travesty.
The violent crime rate of Washington DC is a direct result of your (and the city’s) policy of disarming the innocent, thereby making the streets and homes criminal safety zones
My fondest hope is that at some point you will have to live, unarmed, in a city such as the one over which you preside.
I can already see future cases headed for the SCOTUS, and by the time they get there, who knows what the composition of the court will be.
Really, though, it doesn’t matter. It’s nice that this decision went our way, relatively speaking, but NO government entity has final say on a pre-existing (to the U.S. Constitution) right, regardless of how solemn and sacred the institution. ANY local, state, or federal law which restricts law-abiding folks from obtaining, owning, and bearing arms is immoral and the institution from which it emanates is worthy only of contempt.
I am not sure who appointed her as God but she sure seems to think this happened.
Well, she and her Marxist ways are on the way out - as signaled by the Heller ruling. Good riddence!
Until then, as we were all created equal, I am requesting the same security she is provided - provided at MY expense!
Ms. Lanier,
As a sworn police officer, I must take certain offense to your “Memo”. I am personally offended that you would attempt to speak for me and my Brothers and Sisters, and use your “authority” to deny people their rights. Your memo shows those people that we SERVE that we don’t care for their rights. Read that again; WE serve THEM. We are not entitled to special rights, nor to remove their rights, except in the performance of a lawful arrest for a genuine criminal act, and then only those rights that are lost with arrest and imprisonment.
First off, the Supreme Court PROPERLY interpreted the fact that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right.
Second, only someone who cannot read and understand the English language can possibly misinterpret the words “keep” (to possess, to own, to have) , “bear” (to carry on their person, to have with them) arms, and “shall not be infringed” (meaning you SHALL NOT take away the RIGHT, in any manner, no matter however SLIGHT). If you have attained your position without being able to read and understand the English language, then I fear for the safety of the citizens of your community.
This Supreme Court decision means, Chief, in PLAIN ENGLISH, that “We The People” DO have the right to carry arms, of those of common use, INCLUDING semi-automatic handguns, OUTSIDE our homes, or wherever we may be; and you have NO legitimate or Constitutional authority to deny this God given right to the people you SERVE. Oh, and “people”, by the way, means ALL the people, and not just those that you arbitrarily choose to permit.
There is no other want to interpret the Second Amendment. If you disagree, that is fine. The Constitution and Bill Of Rights was written so that people in “authority”, people like YOU, that disagree with these rights, that feel we should not have these very rights guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill Of Rights to We The People, cannot remove those rights from us. And it is about time the Supreme Court put you in your place with the very words of that Constitution and Bill Of Rights.
Finally, as a sworn police officer, I want to know what fantasy land these “authorities” live in, where they expect that the police can INSTANTLY arrive to solve people’s problems?
This country was built on SELF-RELIANCE. If I were not a police officer, just the average joe that is not “allowed” to carry a gun in your jurisdiction; WHY should I be at the mercy of those predators, murderers, thieves, that care not what laws are passed against arming themselves?
I have every right, as a US Citizen, to defend myself, and finally, the Supreme Court said, in clear terms, that I DO have the right to possess the tools of self reliance, the tools that make it possible to defeat those predators.
It is about time that ALL the Police Chiefs, Commissioners, etc., on down to the “cop on the beat”, in this country STOP treating law abiding citizens like the ENEMY, and instead treat them with the knowledge that we SERVE the public, that we are here to HELP them, and that we are NOT to deny them their Constitutional Rights.
Charles Featherman
I couldn’t possibly say it any better than Officer Featherman above. Chief Lanier needs a wake-up call in the form of a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Hopefully someone can educate her in a court of law to what her actual job description is, because I’m most definitely sure that it is NOT Defiler of Constitutional Rights & Enabler of Violent Criminals.
Anyone that stands for Gun Control is a Violent Crime Advocate & a Criminal Enabler.