Couple sues to challenge constitutionality of NMI gun law
A U.S. Navy Gulf War veteran and his Chinese wife, who suffered serious injuries during a home invasion, have filed a lawsuit in federal court to challenge the constitutionality of the CNMI Weapons Control Act that prohibits all residents from obtaining handguns for self-defense purposes.
David J. Radich and his wife, Li-Rong Radich, are suing Department of Public Safety Commissioner James C. Deleon Guerrero for violation of their right to keep and bear firearms.
The Radich couple, through counsels Daniel T. Guidotti and David G. Sigale, asked the U.S. District Court for the NMI to issue injunctions enjoining Deleon Guerrero from enforcing against them the prohibitions on virtually all CNMI residents from obtaining handguns for self-defense purposes and the probation on obtaining a Weapons Identification Card (WIC) and possessing a firearm for self-defense purposes; and for good cause requirement for obtaining a WIC.
The couple asked the court to declare that such prohibitions are null and void because they infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms in violation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Radich was born in California. He is an honorably discharged U.S. Navy veteran who served in the Gulf War. He used to work at a public school on Tinian then moved to Saipan in 2008 to work for an environmental consulting firm. He and Li-Rong have been married since 2009.
Guidotti and Segale stated in the complaint that the couple have been and continue to be extremely concerned about the self-defense of their persons.
The lawyers disclosed that in 2010, while Radich was away and his wife, Li Rong, was at home alone, their home was invaded.
Li Rong was attacked and beaten resulting in injuries, including two broken ribs, facial contusions, and a suspected broken orbital bone and eye socket.
Li Rong screamed out for help and caused the home invader to leave. She eventually recovered physically, but both plaintiffs incurred medical bills for Li Rong’s care.
Guidotti and Sigale said the CNMI prohibition on possession of handguns by virtually all CNMI residents, significantly limits the plaintiffs’ ability to protect themselves and their family in the event of violence.
At the same time, the lawyers said, plaintiffs’ ability to obtain a Weapons Identification Card (WIC) for self-defense purposes significantly limits their ability to protect themselves and their family in the event of violence.
On July 31, 2013, the couple applied to the CNMI Department of Public Safety for a WIC.
The DPS commissioner is the authority charged with issuing WIC to residents of the CNMI.
The lawyers said though the law requires a WIC to be issued if an application is not denied within 60 days, plaintiffs received neither a WIC nor a denial during that time period.
In September 2013, Radich contacted the commissioner’s office regarding their pending WIC applications, and that a representative for the commissioner informed them that their applications were being reviewed by the Office of the Attorney General.
The lawyers said Radich and his wife have been denied the ability to legally register and possess handguns for immediate self-defense.
The lawyers said the Second Amendment “guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”
Buenas Mr and Mrs. Radich,
It has been long over due for someone to challenge the CNMI Statute that prevents law abiding United State Citizens from owning hand guns.
Kudos to you two for standing up for our rights to keep and bear arms (hand guns) in the CNMI.
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
if any trigger happy idiot kills an innocent and unarmed person, can i get a license and kill him b4 he does it again?
you need a gun to defend yourself in the mainland, i don’t think we need them here. allowing them here will cause us to really get a license and a hand gun. what do you you think?
Buenas fan4life,
If there is trigger happy individual, he doesn’t need to wait for the legalization of hand guns in the CNMI to commit a crime. Fully automatic, high power rifles, assault rifles, hand guns and the locals call it morros. It existed from the day I could remember.
Most of these weapons change hand in the under world entities in the CNMI and it is hard to detect or monitor. Illegal weapons goes hand in hand with the drug trade in the CNMI. For a local to go hay wire or trigger happy is unheard of in the CNMI, but they do have the resources to do so or in other words illegal guns are in abundance in the CNMI.
So to assume that it will give happy trigger individuals the opportunities to commit crimes is misleading. If there is a happy trigger individuals in the CNMI, they most likely have access to illegal guns and we have not seen anyone going postal on anyone yet.
But again you might be right and we need to addressed each and everyone’s concern in our island chain.
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
Finally someone brings this to court. The AG office has side stepped this on numerous occasions when hand guns have been involved with crime.
It will be interesting on how this comes comes out.
My problem with the outcome of this when the 2nd amendment eventually wins, is the total incompetence in any Fed and local requirements to issue permits for handguns. As with everything else here it will all come down to the family name and political affiliation and not to the actual background of the person.
DPS will issue guns to criminals and mentally unstable persons while the legitimate persons will be denied.
Captain,
If you become aware of any “legitimate person” denied a license after the Radich’s win their lawsuit, it is incumbent upon you to direct them to legal help resources. Have them reach out to local counsel in this case, because what you are stating may be a violation of a federal court injunction.
Federal judges are not to be trifled with. They have no issue directing the US Marshals to drag an elected official into court, and when they refuse to explain why, they get thrown into a jail-cell until they cooperate.
Let’s hope your view on what will happen will not occur, but it is your responsibility, when you see something wrong, to say something to someone who can effectively end the injustice.
I will be watching this very closely. I also know the people involved in this suit. After this is finished there will be so many people watching the actions of DPS, including the Feds.
The biggest problem at this point in time is there are no local laws that preclude any convicted felon from owning firearms.
These DPS cannot even handle the registration renewals of the present firearms and keep giving out “grace periods” Before many firearms were years without renewals.
The problem that will arise is from the issuing authority for permits to follow Fed. laws on background checks etc.
This will be either due to the total incompetence or the “local style” and hopefully this will bring the wrath of the feds down on them, either way. It will defiantly be a learning experience.
I also expect there will be an appeal from the Govt. Hopefully by then we will have an elected AG that is complaint and knowledgeable.
So we know that alcohol and domestic abuse is a problem in the CNMI. Casino in the horizon. Our Police force (bless their hearts) do their best but still are inadequately trained. Lets hope that everyone in the community, the agencies involved and the elected officials think long and hard about this, cover all bases, dot their i’s and cross their t’s etc…
Domestic abusers, those convicted or under a domestic violence restraining order, are not allowed to possess guns or apply for a WIC. Also, those hospitalized for alcohol or drugs are disallowed from applying for a license.
Yes and therefore you can guarantee that they will never posses a firearm.
Buenas Tinalakattne Yantitiyas,
In our humanly world, there is no such thing as guarantee. Convicted felons in the CNMI had been seen carrying guns and the so call DPS were partly to be blame, because they look the other away most of the time not some of the time.
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
I can’t guarantee that no more than one can guarantee that a person without a drivers license can decide to just jump into a car and start driving down the street. More on this later.
You did read my stand-alone post about what the lawsuit does or does not do, right?
DPS already has an existing firearms registration system that follows a gun’s serial # all the way from importation into the CNMI to a firearms dealer, all the way to the WIC card holder. You can’t transfer a gun to another person (except for your spouse, who you can jointly own a gun with them since it’s a community property jurisdiction) without notifying DPS. That’s a felony. You violate, you not only lose your WIC, you also become a federally prohibited possessor on top of the prison time you’re already getting for doing the transfer, plus accessory charges for crimes committed with said illegally transferred gun.
Continuing the car allegory: The solution isn’t to ban cars entirely so that can never happen (as the CNMI handgun ban does in this case), but to allowing the already existing license system to continue and punish people if they go outside of the restrictions of the license.
The Radich’s have not committed a crime here. In fact, rather than violating the laws of the Commonwealth and then using a criminal defense, they are so law abiding that they instead went the route of going after the statutes in federal court.
Those rights are not subject to a “thieves veto”, as much as you may desire it so. The District of Columbia made that argument for their handgun ban and lost under 2A grounds. The City of Chicago made that argument to keep their handgun ban and also lost on 2A & 14th Amendment grounds.
The State of Illinois made that argument and lost their carry ban, and the District of Columbia, despite being the seat of the US Government, also lost their carry ban too making that same argument.
The Radich’s, along with all citizens and residents of the Commonwealth, are entitled to their fundamental constitutional rights and they are entitled to exercise it within the Commonwealth’s borders.
Better hope they do not win. The last thing we need is hundreds of handguns in the community. Thinking that the rules about who can own them is going to stop them from getting into the wrong hands is naive and foolish.
Compared to the rest of the world, the CNMI has been relatively safe in a great part because our community isn’t full of handguns.
Sad as the Radish’s experience is, arming people with handguns is not going to make the CNMI safer. To date, the CNMI has a low murder and violent crime rate. Arming the public will end that. The victims will be our friends, relatives and even our children.
Chamole, there are already hundreds of handguns in the community, just unlawfully and illegally possessed, smuggled in on ships, primarily.
When you say “Sad as the Radich’s experience is”, and then say something like “the victims will be our friends, relatives, and even our children”, please stop lying about you feeling sad. It’s a throw-away statement meant to insulate you from criticism of your later words. You don’t actually mean it. Home invaders certainly have friends and relatives, and perhaps parents. They should find a new line of work when Radich’s win (and they will).
WIC applicants, if approved, have to go through safety training, which will address safe storage, and that is not challenged in the lawsuit.
The federal courts strike down violations of liberty that are done on behalf of democratic government. For example, Guam attempted to ban both abortion and even speaking about abortion, and was smacked down in the federal courts, and that’s not even a right that’s specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights like the 2nd amendment is.
That’s the thing about individual rights. It belongs to the individual, not the community. It doesn’t matter if 5000 people in the CNMI want legal handguns, or just 1. It is not your choice. It is not the government’s choice. It is theirs and theirs alone. Period.
Buenas Gray Peterson,
Many of my buddies paid the ultimate price protecting our freedom and for us to enjoy our individual rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
Back then, everybody knows everyone at our port of entry, uzis three fifty seven, nine mil, thirty eight special, etc. were intack, unchecked coming in from outside the CNMI. In the case of AKs, AR-15, thirty thirty, twelve gauge, etc. were broken down in pieces and were hidden inside cars, engines, etc, that where being ship from else where to the CNMI. The x-ray machines and the ammunition sniffing dogs at the CPA are a day late and a dollar short. Every now and then you would be lucky if you hear a fully automatic or a run away rifle going off in the jungle and there is distinction between a regular semi-auto and a fully automatic. Or better yet, you might be lucking if you see tracer rounds flying through the sky during the holiday season. Off course not the green color tracers, but the red color ones which are manufacture in the USA for military use.
In business “if there is demand there will be supply.”
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
The victims I spoke about are not people who use the guns in a crime, but rather the people they and others will kill. Drive-by victims, victims of lost tempers, children who play with guns. Nothing insincere about feeling for the Radich’s either. I feel for them and the long-term effects of being attacked in their home that they will suffer. However, adding handguns to the equation isn’t going to make this island less violent – it will do the opposite.
If there are hundreds of illegal handguns here, and I believe there are, making handguns legal will result in there being thousands of handguns here.
Overnight the CNMI will become like so many other mainland communities with gun voilence becoming a way of life. Our law enforcement people will instantly greatly endangered, our kids will be in danger, etc.
I have a suggestion for you Mr. Peterson. If you like handguns so much and they are not legal here because the people who live here don’t want them, maybe you should consider moving instead of advocating using legal means to force them into our community. There are plenty of places where you can be happy and have your guns. The town of Columbine comes to mind.
“I have a suggestion for you Mr. Peterson. If you like handguns so much and they are not legal here because the people who live here don’t want them, maybe you should consider moving instead of advocating using legal means to force them into our community. There are plenty of places where you can be happy and have your guns. The town of Columbine comes to mind.”
You’re talking about a fundamental civil right, Chamole.
You can’t require Radich’s to move in order exercise a fundamental civil right any more than the Guam Legislature required the women of Guam to fly to Hawaii to terminate their pre-viability pregnancy.
A federal judge in MS ruled against a state making a claim that if a woman wanted to get an abortion, they can just travel to a neighboring state to get said abortion. The argument of the state was ridiculous, and your argument is exactly the same.
I would bet we will have less repeat offenders involved with “home invasions” and robbery.
One of two reasons; Some will be worried about being shot and killed. The others will be shot and killed.
I have been the :”intended” victim in both type scenario’s in other areas.
BTW, there are many law abiding individuals that have unlicensed hand guns along with so many of the criminals.
There are also so many cases that do not get publicized as the AG office and also the cops do not want this to come to court as has been shown in recent times by the last specific two cases that the AG has dropped the “illegal” gun charges in an attempt to keep this out of court hands.
Recently the Fed Court charged one of the individuals with “a felon in possession” Also parole and other violations.
Many cops that I know also have illegal hand guns. Go figure!
Just the recipe for more crimes. For now the law on owning hand Guns must remain as is and when there is sufficient data to make the changes then by all means make the changes .
degkai,
” For now the law on owning hand Guns must remain as is”
It is not your choice. Per the 9th Circuit (which the district court in the CNMI is bound by):
One of Heller’s most important lessons is that the Second Amendment “codif[ies] a pre-existing right” whose contours can be understood principally through an evaluation of contemporaneous accounts by courts, legislators, legal commentators, and the like. Heller, 554 U.S. at 603, 605, 128 S.Ct. 2783; see also McDonald, 130 S.Ct. at 3056-57 (Scalia, J., concurring) (“The traditional restrictions [on the keeping and bearing of arms] go to show the scope of the right.”). Tracing the scope of the right is a necessary first step in the constitutionality analysis-and sometimes it is the dispositive one. See Heller, 554 U.S. at 628-35, 128 S.Ct. 2783. “[C]onstitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them….” Id. at 634-35, 128 S.Ct. 2783. A law that “under the pretence of regulating, amounts to a destruction of the right” would not pass constitutional muster “[u]nder any of the standards of scrutiny that we have applied to enumerated constitutional rights.” Id. at 628-29, 128 S.Ct. 2783. Put simply, a law that destroys (rather than merely burdens) a right central to the Second Amendment must be struck down. Id.
———-
The CNMI Handgun & Carry ban destroys the right. Full stop.
What your suggesting is similar to telling gay people to “go slow” in filing lawsuits against the bans against marriage bans targeted at them, especially in light of the Windsor ruling against DOMA. They aren’t following your suggestions…
A civil right is a civil right, degkai.
Finally and thank you……Dont worry Mr. & Mrs. Radich, I got your back on this one…..I as a US CITIZEN fully support the 2nd Amendment. Let me ask you all this…..When There Is A Bombing, We Blame The BOMBER….When There Is A Drunk-Driving Accident, We Blame The DRIVER….and When There Is A Shooting, Why Do You Blame The GUN?……Example: You set a timed bomb and ran, it will explode….You put a vehicle on drive and ran, It could hurt or kil somebody….You lock and load a Firearm and ran, That Firearm cant even harm a fly, hurt anybody or explode….Just Saying.
Buenas Chamlau Mutt,
Welcome to our neck of our woods, what brings you to the CNMI Media? Are you from Oregon or from Fairfax, VA?
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
Born and Raised on the “LAND of THE THEIVES”…SAIPAN…Im in Oregon at the moment…Couldn’t find a job in Saipan because i had no connections or family in the Govt….lol
That would fall under the 1st Amendment…..Freedom of Speech
Why do you care and what does it matter. Ooooooh you can look up IP addresses…..Didcha want a cookie?
Buenas Eloy,
I guest it is a habit that I pick up earlier in my life in the streets (no man’s land) and it is call survival instinct.
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
Why did you say “Chinese wife” Ferdie? Couldn’t you just have said “Wife”?
It seems like quite a few people misunderstand what this case does and what it doesn’t do.
There are three aspects to what this case does:
It challenges the good cause requirement in the WIC application which says that self defense is not a good reason for any firearm, even a .22LR or .410 shotgun.
It challenges the possession ban on handguns and handgun ammunition, even to WIC license holders.
It challenges the prohibition on carry and use, even in the home for self defensive purposes.
——-
It does not challenge:
The requirement for a WIC to possess any firearm, or to transfer firearms
The training requirement contained in 6 CMC 2204(d) (referencing Mandatory Firearms Safety Class) before issuance of a WIC.
The overall Commonwealth & Federal prohibitions against gun licensing and possession by users of controlled substances (such as ice), as well as felons, domestic violence misdemeanants, those who have declared mentally incompetent or committed into a mental institution.
Regulations against minors possession of firearms.
——————-
Even with three laws challenged laws nullified, the CNMI’s laws will be stricter than nearly all mainland jurisdictions.
It’s about time. Keep in mind this revenue as well for the cnmi……..like casino right…..
On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Heller v. District of Columbia.[3][4]The Supreme Court struck down provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975as unconstitutional, determined that handguns are “arms” for the purposes of the Second Amendment, found that the Regulations Act was an unconstitutional ban, and struck down the portion of the Regulations Act that requires all firearms including rifles and shotguns be kept “unloaded and disassembled or bound by atrigger lock.” “Prior to this decision the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 also restricted residents from owning handgunsexcept for those registered prior to 1975
Bueans Mr. Sablan,
Keep in mine that our Legislature doesn’t understand what constitutional and unconstitutional relating to the United States Constitution. There were statutes created by the CNMI Legislative body in the past knowing that It violates precedent or court ruling from the United States Supreme Court. Maybe there should be mandatory classes teaching our elected officials that any court ruling by the 9th Circuit and the United States Supreme affects the CNMI. The mentality of ram rodding a bill through the CNMI Legislature and let someone challenge it in the judicial system is a waste of our resources. What is the purpose of having legal counsels at our legislature and they are afraid to speak up? Maybe, because they don’t want to lose their job security.
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
If the CNMI Legislature doesn’t know what constitutional and unconstitutional is relating to the US Constitution after all these years they never will and need to get out of public office. The Stars and Stripes fly over this land and therefore the US Constitution is law.
Buenas ABUSER,
Your alias name strike a cord in my body, because before I reply to anyone on the CNMI media, I kind a do a back ground analysis on such alias name and yours does not want to give me any of your comments. Also, your alias sounds not right and I am not privy to answer any of your comments.
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
Thanks, I don’t care for all the drama, and trying to make sense of your english.
Buenas ABUSER,
Thanks for your advice, that is the reason why I make an effort to write so I can improve my English writing without paying any tuition. It is call free writing and I write what ever comes out of my mind. I apologized if I offended you with my comments above.
Si Yu’us Ma’ase
CNMI citizens owning weapons would be great if we have the mechanism in place to deal with the “other” baggages it comes with. As of now, CNMI don’t have “those” mechanism so it should just be left alone. It is what it is.
But of course, some guy or entity will figure it would be a “good” business to open (range and handgun training etc), rant about all its “positive” aspects and to heck with everything else.
“CNMI citizens owning weapons would be great if we have the mechanism in place to deal with the “other” baggages it comes with. As of now, CNMI don’t have “those” mechanism so it should just be left alone.”
No.
The Covenant, the agreement between Congress & the CNMI, says the Second Amendment applies to the territory.
Not to mention your entire premise is wrong. The CNMI already has existing mechanisms.
http://www.cnmilaw.org/frames/Commonwealth%20Code.html
Title 6, Division 2, Chapter 2. That is the very extensive existing laws for the Weapons Control Act.
This would be terrible for this community. NO ONE will be safer if our firearms laws are not withheld. In fact, we will all be much less safe, and much more in danger of being shot.
I totally disagree. I WILL be safer and so will my family.
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” – Robert A. Heinlein
Aside from that I will defend my family and property with vigor from those that transgress. I am so tired of thieves.
Shooting a thief is and still would be illegal. A robber or home invader on the other hand. It’s about defense of your life, not property.
I agree. Legalizing handguns will put our community in danger as hundreds of handguns enter our homes each year. Imagine how many we will have in just a few years. Practically none will leave these islands. Small children will play with them, bullied kids will take them to school, abusive spouses will use them in anger, they will be used in crimes. Every one of us will be in significantly greater danger of being shot, but especially our young people in the drug culture and our policemen.
People who think they have an advantage when they can buy a gun are naive. They forget that thousands of others will have them too and the chances of one being use on a crime on them is increased a thousand-fold.
Handguns are illegal here because we don’t want them. Using legal means to force them on the community that doesn’t want them is the height of arrogance and disrespect.
“Handguns are illegal here because we don’t want them. Using legal means to force them on the community that doesn’t want them is the height of arrogance and disrespect.”
Good thing the gay couples in heavily anti-gay states like Idaho, Utah, Oklahoma didn’t listen to that advice, eh? Should those gay couples move to Hawaii or California?
Here’s a good comparison.
“gay marriage is illegal here because we don’t want gays marrying in our community. Using legal means to force gay marriage on the community that doesn’t want them is the height of arrogance and disrespect”.
Civil rights are to the individual choice, Chamole, not the communities. The Covenant and the US Constitution restrains your community from using the government to ban something they dislike.