Mar
10
2007
As you may know, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently overturned the District's ban on guns, citing an obscure set of documents known as the American Constitution. This turn of events has lathered up some folks; among them, the folks over at the Washington Post. The ruling has been termed "dangerous" and has been portrayed as threatening the safety of law-abiding citizens everywhere. Of course, we all know how "safe" the District of Columbia has been since the implementation of their gun ban. Routinely ranked among the top ten urban areas in the USA in terms of violent crime prior to implementation of the gun ban, D.C. has to this day retained that honor. And while banning guns has a proven track record of complete irrelevance, the folks at the Post and elsewhere decry the ruling and insist that it must be challenged. What other Amendments would they like to ban? Freedom of speech, perhaps?
Mar
10
2007
From this mornings Seattle Times, reaction from yesterdays ruling on the 2nd Amendment in the District of Columbia. Some highlights:
WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court Friday for the first time overturned a gun-control law by declaring that the Second Amendment grants a person the right to possess firearms.
The 2-1 ruling outraged Mayor Adrian Fenty and other city leaders who said gun-related crimes could increase. But it elated opponents of strict gun controls because it knocked down one of the toughest laws in the country and vindicated their rights under the Second Amendment.
The District of Columbia's law bars all handguns unless they were registered before 1976; it was passed that year in an effort to curb gun violence. But it has come under attack over the past three decades. Friday's ruling guts key parts of the law but does not address provisions that bar people from carrying unregistered guns outside the home.
Read the rest of the post
here....