Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Effectiveness Of DC Gun Ban Very Much In Question

After thirty years, it really hasn’t done much to stop gun crime.

WASHINGTON - Three decades ago, at the dawn of municipal self-government in the District of Columbia, the city’s first elected mayor and council enacted one of the country’s toughest gun-control measures, a ban on handgun ownership that opponents have long said violates the Second Amendment.

All these years later, with the constitutionality of the ban now probably headed for a US Supreme Court review, a much-debated practical question remains unsettled: Has a law aimed at reducing the number of handguns in the District made city streets safer?

Although studies through the decades have reached conflicting conclusions, this much is clear: The ban, passed with strong public support in 1976, has not accomplished everything the mayor and council of that era wanted it to.

Over the years, gun violence has continued to plague the city, reaching staggering levels at times.

Gun bans aren’t just unconstitutional, they’re bad social policy.

What’s rather unique about the current challenge to DC’s gun ban going before the Supreme Court is that the folks arguing the government’s side of this are saying that the text of the 2nd amendment limits the right to bear arms to militias only.  Which requires a rather large amount of tortured interpretation of the text as written, but is also flat-out wrong when you consider that our founders considered our nation’s “militia” to be the citizens themselves. 

Remember that this country was founded by citizen-soldiers.  A situation where the government had all the guns would not only have been alien to them, it would have been the very thing they were trying to prevent in the first place.

Comments

GUN BANNING GOVERNMENTAL OFFICIALS

To run this subversive mayor through a punishing gauntlet of the American People: widely publicize his name; to condemn him to run the patriot’s gauntlet, for his Constitutional crime. It be made clear that his fate will be the fate of any gun banning governmental official in America.

Jeugenen on November 20, 2007 at 11:53 am

The US Supreme Court announced late this morning that it will hear the appeal of
Parker v. District of Columbia, 478 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2007), in which both the Federal District Court and the US Court of Appeals ruled against the District of Columbia’s 30 year ban on the private ownership of handguns.

A very detailed and succinct discussion of the issues and arguments can be found here.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on November 20, 2007 at 12:03 pm

Bat One: At this juncture I don’t have a lot of faith in the Supremes to actually decide a case based on what the Constitution actually states, that is a fantasy!


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on November 20, 2007 at 03:55 pm

Neiman,

I won’t disagree with your assessment.  But I will suggest that the Court’s last term saw Chief Justice Roberts “grow” into his office and become more assertive of his leadership role on the Court.

I think what we now have, overall, is a cautiously conservative Supreme Court, one which is like to issue a ruling in support of the District and Appellate courts’ rulings, but limited in scope.  The proper role of the Court is not to make new law, in either partisan direction, but to say what is not constitutional.  My guess is that Justices Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia, and possibly Kennedy as well, will craft a limited consensus in support of individual rights, but nothing sweeping.

Considering the crime rate in DC, the District is hard-pressed to demonstrate the effectiveness of their ordinance.  It would seem, rather, that the only people with guns are exactly the ones who should not have them:  the bad guys, and Democrat Senator James Webb.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on November 20, 2007 at 04:50 pm

The simple fact that DC, one of the tightest security zones in North America, is a low-grade combat zone, is indicative of the fact that no one, and I mean NO ONE, elected, appointed, or hired to any position within our government gives a fuck about the citizens of the Metro DC region or this nation. Secure the borders, anyone?


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on November 20, 2007 at 08:36 pm

SACRED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO BEAR ARMS

Not primarily for collecting; not primarily for hunting; but primarily for a well regulated militia in every state - ready, when faced with intolerable governmental tyranny, for explosive bloody revolt.

Every American child should grow up knowing exactly how to safely use an automobile-privilege, for transportation; every American child should grow up knowing exactly how to safely use a gun-right, for bloody revolt.

Every sensible person knows that the American Constitutional Right to Bear Arms is a sacred integral part of the American system of government, by the People and for the People, comparable to the powers of their executive, legislative, or judicial branches of government.

Every sensible governmental official has a very healthy respect for the inherent revolutionary powers of the American People over their own tyrannical leaders.

Jeugenen on December 3, 2007 at 05:36 pm

Not primarily for collecting; not primarily for hunting…

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand?


"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

robert108 on December 3, 2007 at 05:46 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.