Should the D.C. Handgun Ban Have Been Overturned?

Recommend (13) Comments (34)

The U.S. Supreme Court soon will decide District of Columbia v. Heller, a challenge to the D.C. law that makes it illegal to keep an operable firearm in your home for self-defense.

The question before the Supreme Court is clear: Does the D.C. law violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who wish to keep handguns and operable firearms in their homes?

The issue before the court transcends legal hair splitting, and rises above the politics of gun control.  The issue before the court is literally one of life and death.

Americans use firearms more than two million times every year in acts of self-defense. And in the vast majority of incidents, not a single shot is fired. These victories over violent criminals are won every day and every night . . . all across America.

Everywhere, that is, but Washington, D.C. In D.C., the basic God-given right to self-defense is a right denied. If you live in D.C., you face an obscene choice  either place yourself at the mercy of criminals, or become a criminal yourself by possessing the most effective tool with which to defend your life.

The results of D.C.’s social experiment are clear.  Since D.C. imposed its 1976 laws, it has earned the unfortunate distinction of being the “murder capital of the United States.” D.C.’s murder rate had been declining before 1976, but it increased thereafter. Between 1976-1991, it rose 200 percent, while the U.S. murder rate rose only nine percent.