Guns

Perhaps you’ve seen that the Supreme Court overturned the District’s gun ban. Several things to note:

1) Gun control laws are without a doubt effective at reducing gun crimes and homicides.

2) On the other hand, the District’s law was entirely futile, given that it borders a state with some of the loosest gun laws around.

3) I expect neither disaster nor nirvana to result from this ruling.

4) I will not be purchasing a gun; for the vast majority of the population gun ownership is almost certain to bring more bad effects than good ones.

5) While it’s nice to think that this might encourage the MPD to focus its resources on prevention, I suspect that it will instead encourage the MPD to focus its resources on firearm upgrades for its officers.

6) As annoying as the dueling “gun ban good”, “gun ban bad” newspaper columns were, we’ll all soon wish we had them back once the dueling “armed hero saves family”, “armed moron accidentally kills self, suspected intruder/mailman” newspaper columns begin rolling in.

Comments

  1. BeyondDC says:

    We knew this would happen. We’ve known since the District pinned its argument on emotion rather than law.

    I’m not a lawyer, but even I know that if you want to convince a court to uphold a ban on something guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, you pin your argument on the long-successful and totally legal concept of time, place and manner restrictions, not on emotional pleas or even crime statistics.

    Trying to effectively overturn the 2nd amendment was doomed to fail from the start. Selling DC as specifically an inappropriate place for a certain type of weapon, on the other hand, could have succeeded. All the District had to do was write a law that permitted guns, but only in certain areas at certain times.

  2. Christopher says:

    The question that I heard someone raise is did the SCOTUS add a new right — the right to self defense? That could open up a whole host of issues.

    It seems, though. That SCOTUS didn’t say anything about regulation, just an outright ban.

    I still think they are misinterpreting the 2nd amendment, which says nothing about individual gun ownership.

  3. monkeyrotica says:

    I’m looking forward to the “armed moron saves family” headlines. Because people like me need a role model.

    I’m with #3. Zero sum game. For every intruder shot you’ll have some fool shooting a cleaning rod into his skull. Then again, it might just be the labotomy he needed to get that senior management position. Things are looking up!

  4. Nanonymous says:

    The right to self defense has existed in common law for centuries. It’s nothing new.

  5. jibble says:

    1) Gun control laws are without a doubt effective at reducing gun crimes and homicides.

    That’s funny. One of America’s most prominent left-of-center criminologists disagrees with you.

  6. Anonymous says:

    This blog is apparently under attack by a virulent virus of indecipherable letter combinations.