Constitution - - - Or Not?

Greetings and Salutations to All my Kith and Kin and All the Ships in Outer Space:

Okay, let me see if I can get this all straight - - -

A few days ago (I lost track of time), some Federal Appeals Court ruled that the anti-gun laws in the District of Columbia violated the United States Constitution.

That very day, in a panic, the mayor and chief of police here in Washington, D.C. go on television to say they are going to enforce the gun laws, even if the court has ruled those laws are wrong.

Am I correct so far?

Hmmm - - - isn't that contempt of court?

Why weren't the mayor and chief of police immediately arrested and prosecuted?

Yesterday, a congressional aide was arrested for carrying a loaded firearm.

Why?

Remember, the anti-gun laws in the District of Columbia have been ruled unconstitutional, or so I understand.

What about the Capitol Police officers who made that arrest, and the magistrate (or whoever) that arraigned the congressional aide?

Shouldn't they all be arrested and charged with contempt of court?

Shouldn't they be sued for false arrest, false imprisonment, and violation of civil rights?

Does our Constitution mean anything, or doesn't it?

If the Federal Appeals Court can rule on a Constitutional issue, then why can't they issue arrest warrants to enforce their own ruling?

Is this all just for show?

Can police do anything they want because they are the only ones wearing guns?

Are the judges powerless to enforce their own rulings because they don't have any guns to back them up?

Please, can one of you all explain what's going on here?

None of this makes sense to me.

Thank you.

John Robert "SAIGON" Mallernee, KB3KWS
Official Bard of Clan Henderson
Armed Forces Retirement Home
Washington, D.C. 20011-8400

NOTE: "My unpopular and controversial personal opinions are independent of my Scottish clan."