Game Fishing Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,685 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anyone been following this?

I found the defense of the DC hand gun ban interesting. They claim a right under the 2nd to own but they also claim a right for the district to protect its citicens by regulating handguns. Even if said right steps on the 2nd. They claim that the majority of violent crime involves a hand gun. I wonder if they would support this: Since the majority of DC crime involves African American males they should pass a law that infringes on their constitutional rights and ban African Americans from entering DC? Would the lefty anti gunners like Eddie support that precedence?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,149 Posts
One of the advocates for keeping the DC gun resriction law in tact is the Mayor of DC who said the reason they (DC) should keep the restriction as it is, 'is to continue to keep DC residents safe from gun crime'. clown:

Someone should have told him the honorable Mayor that crime and murder rate has gone up considerably since the gun restriction laws were put in place over 30 years ago. light:

Before the District banned handguns in 1976, the murder rate had been declining. But soon afterward, the rate climbed to the highest of all large U.S. cities. It also rose relative to nearby Maryland and Virginia as well as relative to other cities with more than 500,000 people. During the 31-year life of the ban, with the exception of a few years during which the city's murder rate ranked second or third, there have been more killings per capita in Washington, D.C. than in any other major city.

In 12 of the years between 1980 and 1997, including all nine years from 1989 through 1997, the violent crime rate in D.C. exceeded 2,000 per 100,000, reaching a high of 2,922 in 1993, versus 1,481 in 1976 â€" a 97 percent increase in violent crime, 17 years after citizens were forbidden from defending themselves with firearms. Moreover, the murder rate climbed as high as 81 per 100,000 inhabitants in 1991 â€" triple the pre-ban levels. As of 2005, the last year for which I have data, the murder rate is still 32 percent above the 1976 level.

Two non-partisan, respected federal government agencies recently examined gun controls and found no statistically significant evidence to support their effectiveness. In 2004, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed 253 journal articles, 99 books, and 43 government publications evaluating 80 gun-control measures. The researchers could not identify a single gun-control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide, or accidents. A year earlier, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported on an independent evaluation of firearms and ammunition bans, restrictions on acquisition, waiting periods, registration, licensing, child access prevention laws, and zero tolerance laws. Conclusion: none of the laws had a meaningful impact on gun violence.

Based on those statistics, there's a compelling argument that Americans deserve an opportunity to defend themselves by possessing suitable firearms. But even if the data were to cut the other way â€" even if it could be demonstrated (which it emphatically cannot) that more gun laws lead to less crime â€" gun laws are not just about public policy. They're about the meaning of the Constitution. Hopefully, the U.S. Supreme Court, at long last, will answer this vital question: Does the right to keep and bear arms belong to us as individuals, or does the Constitution merely recognize the collective right of states to arm the members of their militias?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,460 Posts
Obviously, no. My guess in looking at the questioning from SCOTUS to the sides is that the Supremes will rule that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals. I believe that they will rule that governments have the ability and right to regulate ownership. If I were a betting man, I would guess there is about a 3 to 1 chance that SCOTUS will strike down the DC ban. At this point in time, regardless of my personal bias, the time when banning ownership of handguns had a snowballs chance of succeeding is but a small dot in the rear view mirror.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,685 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Eddie,
Why obviously no? It was not quite so obvious that you supported ( probably still do) one groups rights being walked on for the perception of safety why not anothers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,460 Posts
TK - I'm looking at your bait and deciding that I shall not bite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,057 Posts
I suspect that any body of common sense would carefully consider any law that would make outlaws out such a large segment of the population of this country. Other than the bowl of flakes running San Francisco and the Primate of the land of fruits and nuts.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top