Miller Reveals Red Tape in D.C. Concealed Carry Permitting


Attempting to get a concealed carry permit in Washington D.C. is a joke. For proof, just watch Fox5 investigative reporter Emily Miller’s probe into the issuance process.

If you don’t have time to watch the video, here are four highlights:

Why you ‘need’ it?

In D.C., one is required to prove why the need a Constitutional right before one is allowed to exercise that right. Yes folks, if you’re wondering that’s ass-backwards. The purpose of the Constitution is to define the limitations of government and enshrine the rights of the people. But in our nation’s capital, the Second Amendment only means what it says when one has the approval of the District police chief Cathy Lanier.

Regular danger vs. special danger

Did you know there are different types of danger? Yeah, I didn’t either. In D.C. there’re two kinds of danger: regular danger and special danger. To get a permit one needs to show chief Lanier that they are in special danger. As Miller so eloquently points out, regular danger as in getting raped or murdered on the street by a serial rapists or armed assailant in a city that has a relatively high crime doesn’t really fit the bill. Special danger, as in being targeted or stalked by someone you know or can recognize, does count? So yeah, in that rare instance when you know you’re being targeted for a crime and you can prove it to District police, then they’ll sign off on the permit application. But for all other residents, well, you’re out of luck. You need to either work on your predictive powers like a precog in Minority Report, meet the criminals, rapists and murderers in your neighborhood so you recognize them when they follow you or case your home for a robbery or simply prepare to be a victim.

Where does one get a permit?

To obtain a permit, one needs to complete 18 hours of gun safety and training. Where does one go to do that? Well, to a D.C.-certified instructor of course. There’s only one problem, D.C. doesn’t have any certified instructors. Why doesn’t the District have any certified instructors? Well, it could be the $400 certification fee they slap on prospective candidates.

So, even if you are in “special danger,” you can’t get a permit because there’s no one certified to teach the course.

The British are Coming

This is probably the highlight of highlights in the video, but Miller has an exchange with Milton Agurs, a civilian police department employee who works at the front desk. He was the one who explained the permitting process to Miller.

After going over all the red tape and hoops one has to jump through to get licensed to carry a firearm outside the home, Miller asked Agurs, “The Second Amendment right to bear arms just doesn’t fully apply here?”

Agurs response was classic, “I believe when the Second Amendment was written, that was more or less for when the British were coming.”

Hilarious. Apparently, this man believes that the Second Amendment is outdated now that we’re no longer at war with England. Maybe that’s not even funny. Maybe that’s just pathetically sad.

{ 12 comments… add one }
  • TRob ARob November 18, 2014, 5:09 pm

    It seems that DC looked North to NJ and found a way to restrict the process of obtaining a carry permit. In NJ, the applicant MUST show a specific need and apparently having a motorcycle gang kidnap you across state lines with the intent of killing you is not specific enough. The applicant must have his application approved by a NJ Superior Court Judge. NJ has done this for more than 60yrs

  • Lt. Donn November 18, 2014, 7:18 am

    You choose to live there…you must suffer the consequences…[this] issue is just one of many facing those who live in D/C
    Personally, I would rather kiss a snake than live there

  • Dan November 17, 2014, 7:06 pm

    DC basically lifted the MD state requirements. We here in MD have been fighting the same nonsense.

  • Robert November 17, 2014, 3:17 pm

    Following their train of thought then the police ought to be disarmed along with all the snipers on the rooftops and especially the ones surrounding the White House. (remember the police shootings of innocent bystanders in New York recently?) The police have no reason to believe they will be shot by the criminal types do they? Oh, that’s right. Now I get it. The criminals don’t attack armed police because THEY ARE ARMED WITH WEAPONS!! By the way, does the female police chief carry a personal weapon or have an armed body guard? Why? If Washington D. C. is so safe why is it like an armed camp? Most citizens don’t even know that the nation’s capitol has an armed officer on every corner. One thought they have not considered with their ridiculous “rules.” If someone gets shot and killed on their streets because the local government did not grant permits, then they are open to an unjustified death law suit by the family. I think everyone who can make it down to the police department ought to go and apply and record their effort. Then the proof will be there that the Washington D. C. Police Department does not consider our lives worth defending. I have always argued with my LAPD retired police friend about their motto, “Protect & Defend.” They cannot do either unless they are at the scene of the crime when it is being committed. They really only investigate and solve (hopefully).

    • Jake Monnett November 17, 2014, 5:26 pm

      That is right on,Robert. Who’s going to protect us until the police arrive…one one!

  • Sam November 17, 2014, 1:02 pm

    D. C. is leaving its self wide open to a huge fine, and a red faced slap down. Chicago has been ordered to pay the second of a large fine for legal expenses over basically the same thing. The Constitution, as defined by the supreme court, is not a local perk given to a few, but a right that is guaranteed to all law abiding citizens under the Second Amendment of said Constitution. To deny people the right of the Second Amendment would mean that any amendment is worthless if a local government agency decides to interpret to their own wishes and ends. That is not how the American government is supposed to work, although we have some in power right now that think they are above the law of the land. If tyranny reaches the point that citizens will take it no more, that is why Thomas Jefferson refused to sign the Constitution until it was included.

  • Larry November 17, 2014, 11:33 am

    Also, we kicked the British’s butts about a decade BEFORE The Bill of Rights was even written!

  • Larry November 17, 2014, 11:25 am

    I had a supposed retired DC cop (“Snuffy”) tell me how wonderful Chief Lanier was & that they didn’t want just anyone walking around armed in DC. He was an idiot. If he really is a retired cop, he is a disgrace as he supports violation of the Constitution instead of the oath he took to defend it from all assaults, whether foreign or domestic. If & when the UN troops come to attempt to disarm us, I imagine that good old “Snuffy” will be leading them! Take dead aim, my friends.

  • rick November 17, 2014, 10:20 am

    People who violate the constitution and supress citizen’s rights should be held accountable. We should fill our jails with the real criminals. We are no longer a nation of laws

  • peter November 17, 2014, 9:58 am

    The lady in blue at the end looked so bitter just by her looks and asking no questions you can tell what she believes

  • peter November 17, 2014, 9:56 am

    The lady in blue at the end looked so bitter just by her looks and asking no questions you can tell what she believes

  • Byron S November 17, 2014, 3:17 am

    Typical stuff, I expected that they’d legislate the Rights out of it.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend