<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: D.C. &#8220;30 armed officers in full tactical gear&#8230;.&#8221;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/d-c-30-armed-officers-full-tactical-gear/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/d-c-30-armed-officers-full-tactical-gear/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Oct 2013 00:03:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: VMS		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/d-c-30-armed-officers-full-tactical-gear/comment-page-1/#comment-242832</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[VMS]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Oct 2013 00:03:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=42130#comment-242832</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I think Mr. Witaschek has a very good case. It seems that the District of Columbia Court of Appeals found the law, under which he was charged, unconstitutional back in November 2010. Herrington v United States, 6 A.3d 1237, (DC Ct. of App. 2010) (holding that &quot;[a]s  a corollary of the U,S. Supreme Court&#039;s  holding in DC v. Heller, the unlawful possession of ammunition statute for simply possessing handgun ammunition in the home also violates the Second Amendment. See for yourself:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/dc-court-of-appeals/1543809.html]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Mr. Witaschek has a very good case. It seems that the District of Columbia Court of Appeals found the law, under which he was charged, unconstitutional back in November 2010. Herrington v United States, 6 A.3d 1237, (DC Ct. of App. 2010) (holding that &#8220;[a]s  a corollary of the U,S. Supreme Court&#8217;s  holding in DC v. Heller, the unlawful possession of ammunition statute for simply possessing handgun ammunition in the home also violates the Second Amendment. See for yourself:</p>
<p><a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/dc-court-of-appeals/1543809.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://caselaw.findlaw.com/dc-court-of-appeals/1543809.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: anonymous		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/d-c-30-armed-officers-full-tactical-gear/comment-page-1/#comment-242709</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2013 22:55:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=42130#comment-242709</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&#062; police say they found some ammunition — 
&#062; which is unlawful to possess in D.C., 
&#062; even spent shells and casings,
&#062; unless you are a licensed gun owner

or unless your name is David Gregory.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; police say they found some ammunition —<br />
&gt; which is unlawful to possess in D.C.,<br />
&gt; even spent shells and casings,<br />
&gt; unless you are a licensed gun owner</p>
<p>or unless your name is David Gregory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: En Passant		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/d-c-30-armed-officers-full-tactical-gear/comment-page-1/#comment-242666</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[En Passant]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:44:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=42130#comment-242666</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m shocked but not surprised.

I&#039;m not surprised because Washington, DC is a Constitution-free zone. I hope Mr. Witaschek survives the gulag.

I&#039;m shocked because I once believed that even government officials maintained at least a shred of ordinary human decency.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m shocked but not surprised.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not surprised because Washington, DC is a Constitution-free zone. I hope Mr. Witaschek survives the gulag.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m shocked because I once believed that even government officials maintained at least a shred of ordinary human decency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: William Nuesslein		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/d-c-30-armed-officers-full-tactical-gear/comment-page-1/#comment-242636</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[William Nuesslein]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:22:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=42130#comment-242636</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Some time ago prosecutors changed their nature from seekers of truth and justice to advocates for victims. One woman I know of was accused of being physically abusive of her son by a divorcing husband who needed custody of the child to stay in the United States. The woman was a smoker and of course youngsters clawing over smokers wil brush against the business end of a cigarette every so often. Those occasions morph into extinguishing cigarettes on a child. The woman had to pay a chaperone to be in the room when she visited her son. 

The sited case  seems a taking of a divorcing spouse&#039;s word too seriously. &quot;Better safe than sorry&quot; can generate all kids of mayhem.
It is unfortunate that people can not see themselves as the fools they are. Shaming doesn&#039;t work.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some time ago prosecutors changed their nature from seekers of truth and justice to advocates for victims. One woman I know of was accused of being physically abusive of her son by a divorcing husband who needed custody of the child to stay in the United States. The woman was a smoker and of course youngsters clawing over smokers wil brush against the business end of a cigarette every so often. Those occasions morph into extinguishing cigarettes on a child. The woman had to pay a chaperone to be in the room when she visited her son. </p>
<p>The sited case  seems a taking of a divorcing spouse&#8217;s word too seriously. &#8220;Better safe than sorry&#8221; can generate all kids of mayhem.<br />
It is unfortunate that people can not see themselves as the fools they are. Shaming doesn&#8217;t work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
