A LOOK AT YOUR RIGHTS IN the District of Columbia:
â€œWhatever right the Second Amendment guarantees,â€ wrote the Districtâ€™s chief law enforcer, â€œit does not require the District to stand by while its citizens die.â€
What an excellent example of unintended humor â€” the Districtâ€™s government is a national leader in standing by while its citizens die. Our homicide rate hit a 20-year low in 2005 â€” just 29 victims per 100,000 residents. That is slightly better than New York Cityâ€™s rate (30.7) under Mayor David Dinkins in 1990, when the Big Apple suffered 2,250 homicides. . . .
D.C. residents are strictly forbidden from owning handguns, even in the privacy of their homes. Any long guns must be registered and kept â€œunloaded and disassembled.â€ It is not even legal, strictly speaking, to assemble and load your gun when you hear an intruder downstairs. A lower court ruled the ban unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court will decide later this year whether to take up the case.
In the debate over the gun ban, there is a strong statistical case that an armed citizenry is safer than one disarmed by unconstitutional laws, but this argument is not even necessary. There is absolutely no valid case that the Districtâ€™s gun ban makes me safer as a District resident. When Singer and Mayor Adrian Fenty (D., of course) penned a September 4 Washington Post op-ed stating that â€œThe handgun ban has saved countless lives,â€ were they really suggesting that without the ban there might have been 1,000 murder victims in 1991, instead of just 482? The implication is that D.C. is so totally ungovernable that only a total deprivation of constitutional rights can make it barely livable.
Read the whole thing. Related post here.