Posted by
BLOGASSAULT on Thursday, October 04, 2007 7:17:46 PM
Washington D.C.'s made a lot of news lately in the gun world with their recent lose in a case finding their gun-ban law as
unconstitutional. Shortly there after, Washington D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty filed his case to the
Supreme Court of the United States. Now that the Supreme Court is back in session, the big question is will they hear the case or will they let the lower court ruling stand? Most people I have talked too think they won't take it. Both sides of the issue have a lot too lose by a decision that is not in their favor. I think both sides would like to keep the status quo.
I did come across this interesting article at
Earthtimes.org, were they quote the Violence Policy Center rabble:
"The earlier split decision by the Court of Appeals to overturn the District of Columbia's handgun ban was not only contrary to the overwhelming weight of legal authority, but would certainly increase gun death and injury among District residents while also increasing the risks faced by the law enforcement personnel who protect all residents and workers in Washington, DC.
"Washington, DC's ban on handguns in the home has long protected DC's residents as measured by the District of Columbia's firearm suicide and overall suicide rate. The District's handgun ban provides compelling evidence of how strict gun laws save lives by keeping handguns out of homes. The District of Columbia ranks 51st (last) in the country for firearms suicide for 2004, the most recent year for which statistics are available. The District also ranks last for overall suicide. Maintaining the ban will ensure the health and safety of DC residents. [See http://www.vpc.org/dcsuicide.htm for data on DC suicide rates compared to the 10 states with the highest suicide, gun suicide, and gun ownership rates, as well as a full ranking of all 50 states by their firearm suicide rates and overall suicide rates for the year 2004.]
Suicide seems to be their best reason for keeping guns out of peoples hands in DC. Is there some reason these policy makers think that everybody who lives in DC will commit suicide if guns are allowed back in?
I know the place is full of politicians, lobbyists, and other people of questionable character, but there are lots of ways to commit suicide without the need for a gun.
Unfortunately for them that is all they have to work with statistically.
Click here to see where they rank in gun violence. Even with their ban on guns, as you will notice, they hold the #1 ranking in firearm death rates per 100,000 people in the nation (#1 out of 51). They also hold the #1 spot for violent crime per capita wether a gun was used or not.
Of course, looking through the list, there is no clear indication that more liberal gun laws mean less crime. Both sides of the debate claim their way is best. I happen to agree with having guns, especially on your person, with a properly obtained concealed carry licence. But mostly because it's a guaranteed right, written into our constitution. And if I
had to live in DC, based on the above statistics, I would probably break the law and have a handgun for my protection, assembled and operable in my house. And GOD forbid I ever had to use it, well, I would cross that bridge at that point. And even though the
Violence Policy Center says that I might commit suicide with my assembled and operable handgun in my house, I think being shot by a bad guy in DC is a little more probable.
Really it's pretty simple. Statistics are a way of compiling facts about numbers, it's not a way of determining
why. Easy access or no access to firearms is not the
why in suicide rates. People who want to take their own life will find what ever they need to get the job done. Sure, guns make the act easier, but it's not the tell-all of suicide. Financial problems, relationship issues, mental problems, moral principles, and others; these are the
why's. Neither less guns nor more guns will fix the statistics. But the opportunity to have a gun to protect yourself in your home can
save your life. Most legal owners of firearms have a firearm for that reason alone.
So, as with people who support abortion; they cry "Choice!" So DC should have choice as well. If a law abiding citizen wants a gun, terrific. If they don't, well, that's fine too. (I will not get into the above issue, except to say that shooting a criminal in self-defense is a far cry from killing an innocent child out of convenience.) No one I know is against reasonable limitations on gun ownership. But to keep them in an inoperable state, (which is really no better than not having one at all) having no way to protect yourself against those that do not abide by those laws, is certainly unconstitutional in it's self.
I have asked many people who don't like guns, "Have your ever shot one?"
Most say no. Taught properly and safely, once they pull the trigger, most find it is not some magical killing device. Some actually find some fun in shooting at targets. And the best part is, after pulling that trigger a few times, they didn't wind up with crazy ideas forming in their head about wanting to commit mass murder.
Some go on to own one. Others don't. The point is, it is nice to have a choice in the matter.