Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 3:00 PM ET, 04/27/2010

U.S. Sens. want to repeal D.C. gun laws

By Washington Post editors

Two U.S. senators plan to introduce legislation Tuesday that would repeal most of the District’s gun laws and restrict the D.C. Council from regulating firearms.

The bill comes one week after District officials dropped efforts to secure a voting member in the House because of similar pro-gun language attached to the voting rights legislation.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), the bill’s sponsors, say the measure is intended to ensure that the District has complied with a landmark 2008 Supreme Court decision.

But Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop the Violence, said the legislation fails to recognize that the D.C. Council passed new laws last year to comply with the decision, which have been upheld by a federal judge. The city has already repealed the ban on semiautomatic weapons and allows residents to keep loaded guns in their homes.

-- Ann E. Marimow

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

By Washington Post editors  | April 27, 2010; 3:00 PM ET
Categories:  Crime and Public Safety, DC  | Tags:  Arizona, Council of the District of Columbia, D.C. Council, John McCain, Legislation, Supreme Court of the United States  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Transit workers rally Hill for more funding
Next: DDOT to preview new streetcars


Tell congress to mind it's own business. They treat the District like it's their personal plantation.

Posted by: jckdoors | April 27, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Where do I apply in DC for my RIGHT TO CARRY permit?

Posted by: Robbnitafl | April 27, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Shameless political grandstanding and opportunism by Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and Senator Jon Tester (D-MT). District residents and the Council of the District of Columbia should determine local laws for the District of Columbia. Majority Leader Harry Reid should prevent this measure from coming to a Senate vote.

Robert Vinson Brannum

Posted by: robert158 | April 27, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

It's obvious that 500,000 people in Montana are too few to be a real state, so their Senator needs to get involved with more people's business.

Posted by: blankspace | April 27, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

IF THESE ARE THE SENATORS representing DC interests in Congress, do DC residents get to vote whether they are re-elected in the fall?

Posted by: DC_Grrl | April 27, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

What is wrong with these morons? Congressman are supposed to propose legislation relevant to their OWN STATE OR DISTRICT. Why do the repulikkkans have to interfere with other people's business? If the hicks in Montana and Arizona love their guns more power to them.

Posted by: TheMarylander | April 27, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

I did have respect for McCain, but now I have lost it. I actually think DC is rather stringent with guns b/c the law abiding citizen cannot have a gun, but the crooks on the streets already have them. My problem is that I believe Congress should stay out of local politics. If McCain is concerned with the Supreme Court's decision, he should pass federal legislation that will apply to all states, not just DC. This is political manipulation. These same two republican are all about local and state rights until it comes down to DC. Come on!!!

Posted by: DCJUSTICE | April 27, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

that recent mass shooting isn't enough to show DC need tighter guns standards not none @ all

Posted by: JeroRobson1 | April 27, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Senator John McCain is too old and should not hold a Senators position. More than likely, he will be voted out of office.

His pick of Sara Palin speaks volumns. You can read Ms. McCain's face and see the negative chemistry whenever Palin is on the same stage as McCain.

McCain is old and needs to be put out to pasture.

Posted by: Special_One40 | April 27, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Kckdoors wrote: Tell congress to mind it's own business. They treat the District like it's their personal plantation.


What is gun has to do with race!! Gun doesen't kill people by it self, some one has to pull the I missing something here

Posted by: akhan4 | April 27, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Maybe I'd move back to DC if I could bring my guns.

Posted by: pmendez | April 27, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

I just cannot imagine why the Senate would want to put more guns on the streets of DC. If they're concerned about peoples' rights, give them statehood.

Posted by: dottie_b | April 27, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Here's a proposal for allowing D.C. to have a vote in Congress that is commensurate with its role in American government, and that might not require any constitutional amendment.

For every election, including special elections, residents of the District of Columbia can vote in EVERY senatorial and congressional election, everywhere. This is in recognition of the fact that senators and House members insist on a say in the way D.C. is governed.

I would LOVE the effect this would have on most congressional districts and even senate seats in places like Utah, Arizona and Wyoming.

(Please don't even start with how politically unfeasible this would be to enact. I know it would never pass, but it would actually be more fair than the way D.C. residents are treated now.)

Posted by: FergusonFoont | April 27, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Let's not have a hissy fit, folks. Senators introduce bills by the hundreds every Congress. Bills that go nowhere. For such a bill to become law, it has to go through a number of steps -- one of which is to be passed by the House. And it has to be signed by the President. Neither the leadership of the House nor the leadership of the Senate nor Prsident Obama has inidcated that they'd have any sympathy for such legislation. If the Republicans take over the House and/or Obama gets defeated for a second term, then get back to me.

Posted by: bigfish2 | April 27, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

DC profits enormously from being the seat of the federal government. And yet so many DC citizens seem to have the audacity to complain when the federal government interferes in their business. (Particularly when that business is corrupt, inefficient, unconstitutional, inequitable, illegal, etc.) Amazing. If you want self-determination, move to MD. (I'm assuming you wouldn't move to open carry VA, thank goodness.)

Posted by: JoeSchmoe06 | April 27, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Since Senator Tester decided he should be writing legislation for the District, I decided he must want to do some constituent services for DC residents as well.

I called and asked him if he could help fix the wall in the pocket park near my house. I was struck by a car months ago and still hasn't been fixed. His assistant was very nice and forwarded me to the voice mail of the Legislative Assistant working on the issue.

If you have any concerns, I'd encourage you to give Senator Tester a call. His number is (202) 224-2644.

Posted by: DrewCourtney | April 27, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

What is gun has to do with race!! Gun doesen't kill people by it self, some one has to pull the I missing something here

Let's bring machetes and rocket launchers into federal buildings like the Capitol, then. Machetes and RPGs don't kill, people do.

Posted by: Route1 | April 27, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Just another case of Congress shoving something down our throats. Kind of like ObamaCare, huh?

Posted by: HughJassPhD | April 27, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Hooray! ! !

Posted by: rpeckham1 | April 27, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Great idea! I'm contacting both Senators about a number of potholes. They should be happy to fix those too.

Posted by: blankspace | April 27, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Maybe I'd move back to DC if I could bring my guns.

Posted by: pmendez | April 27, 2010 3:52 PM
DC law already allows you to possess handguns. I'm a DC resident and I own a handgun. If you want to bring a SCUD launcher, stay in Virginia. You don't need anything more than a handgun to defend yourself in your home should the need arise. Every right comes with responsibilities and limitations, a reality that Second Amendment ideologues seem to forget.

As for McCain, he's shamelessly pandering to the far right fringe back in Arizona to beat JD Hayworth at his own game. I guess supporting the recent Arizona immigration law wasn't enough to win over the large teabagger contingent within the GOP. What a colossal disgrace and downfall for a Senator who was once respected across the political spectrum. We all know that this bill is just a stunt, but how sad that a man who was his party's Presidential candidate is reduced to behaving like a damned fool.

Posted by: jaysit | April 27, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

DC by rights and by the Constitution is governed by Congress. It wasn't until Mayor Washington that DC got its own mayor and that power is lent out and can be taken back.

And given the mess DC has made of its self-government chance, and its attempt to circumvent the Constitution and deny US citizen the rights they have in every state, perhaps government of DC ought to revert to Congress, ASAP.

Posted by: wjc1va | April 27, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

If the DC Council had not passed such Draconian restrictions on a constitutional right, this would not be happening. The Council shot themselves in the foot on this one.

Posted by: 41865 | April 27, 2010 4:56 PM | Report abuse

God forbid a jurisdiction would want to govern its own affairs.

Posted by: Route1 | April 27, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

DC profits enormously from being the seat of the federal government. And yet so many DC citizens seem to have the audacity to complain when the federal government interferes in their business.
-Joe Schmoe 6------

WRONG. 72% of the jobs in DC go to non-DC residents, who by law can not be taxed as commuters. This is in total contrast to other big cities who get a share of the $$$ from surrounding jurisdictions. By law the federal government doesn't pay rent or taxes on any of the DC land it uses. So while Oklahoma City gets tax $$$ for all the federal buildings in their city, we get $0.

Posted by: nwrepresent1 | April 27, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

"And given the mess DC has made of its self-government chance, and its attempt to circumvent the Constitution and deny US citizen the rights they have in every state, perhaps government of DC ought to revert to Congress, ASAP."

wjc1va, I don't get it, I thought Conservatives were for "states rights?" Is't that how you plan to stop the Health care bill? I suppose you can only respect and want congress involved when they support the selective "rights" that you stand for. Also, who are you to tell the people of DC how they are governed? This is a Representative democracy, not a dictatorship. I suppose it would be a bit more even if you gave DC a full voting member of the House, but that's asking too much for the GOP racists in Congress to hand the Dems a lock of a black seat, isn't it? My advise to DC, should this bill pass (which it will not)would be to take a page form the GOP play book and either ignore the law or sue to stop it.

Posted by: Standardman76 | April 27, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

As a former U.S. Army officer and paratrooper (and Democrat), I say "bravo" to the Senators, and shame on DC for abandoning their fiduciary responsibilities to the citizens of the District - to secure them representation in Congress. The District of Columbia is being governed by individuals who either can't really grasp the political realities of their situation or are developmentally delayed. They decide to "fall on their swords" over the gun control issue - sacrificing their once in a lifetime opportunity to have a vote in Congress - only to have real members of Congress attempt to further dismantle their gun law anyway. The DC gun ban (overturned by the Supreme Court) had only been a unilateral disarmament of law abiding citizens. Criminals, however, have always had an abundant supply.

Posted by: sodanotpop | April 27, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

That's right people. Be unarmed law abiding citizens. Is this a plantation mentality? Maybe the man will let you have a BB gun someday if you are very, very good.

Posted by: PosterBoy2 | April 27, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

PosterBoy2 --

Our elected representatives, the DC Council, passed legislation limiting access to firearms. That's not a "plantation mentality." That's democracy.

Senators from other states deciding they know what's best for the citizens of DC? That's a plantation mentality.

Posted by: DrewCourtney | April 27, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Well, Del. Norton predicted that exactly this sort of thing would happen if D.C. backed away from seeking voting representation in Congress because of the firearms amendment. Tisk, tisk...

But before mass hysteria sets in, best to see what the bill would actually do, and not do -

What it does: it permanently codifies some of the D.C. Council's loosening of earlier handgun ordinances after the Heller case; it allows residents to purchase firearms directly from Federally licensed retail firearms dealers in MD and VA after passing a NICS background check (since D.C. has no licensed firearms retailers); it prohibits private and public landlords from banning legal guns from rented residences; and it does away with D.C.'s silly, burdensome and largely-ignored registration system. That's all.

What it does NOT do: It does NOT authorize concealed or open carry of firearms outside the home; it does NOT authorize carry of firearms into secure D.C. or Federal government buildings; it does NOT authorize ownership of fully automatic machineguns. That means the D.C. government will still get to impose the third strictest gun control scheme in the U.S., behind only Illinois and Wisconsin.

The only remaining question is whether the bill will get veto-proof majorities when it inevitably passes both Houses (which, if memory serves, the earlier gun amendment DID receive in the Senate when it was attached to the voting rights bill last year).

Posted by: zippypinhead1 | April 27, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

By golly, you thugs may be forced to get jobs yet! Oh . . . your pants are falling down.

Posted by: RepealObamacareNow | April 27, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Judging from many of the posts here, there is a tremendous confusion concerning the status of the DISTRICT of Columbia. DC was established specifically to serve as seat for the Federal government,separate and apart from all of the states. It sits on land ceded by Maryland for the purpose.

Although DC has a mayor and a city council, the United States Congress is and always has been the final authority in DC. In effect, every member of Congress represents DC.

Posted by: Oracle3 | April 27, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Now we see what a disaster "President" John McCain would be. I hope he loses his re-election.

Posted by: Viewpoint2 | April 27, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Now we see what a disaster "President" John McCain would be. I hope he loses his re-election.

Posted by: Viewpoint2 | April 27, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

jaysit - you say you own a handgun in DC, while I seriously doubt it (confusing concealed carry with wanting a SCUD), I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Considering you can't buy a gun in DC (no gun stores) and there is only one FFL dealer willing to do transfers into DC, the process is extremely difficult to even get a handgun into DC...not to mention the overly repressive application and licensing procedures.

All that aside, you can have a handgun in your home but concealed carry is prohibited. How about giving us law abiding citizens, who have done our due diligence and have gone through the repressive process to get licensed, the ability to carry concealed?

But this might all be too much to grasp for someone who uses juvenile sexual terms to describe those they disagree with.

Posted by: mac03521 | April 27, 2010 7:55 PM | Report abuse

If you lived in a state, you could write your Senator. Since you don't live in a state, you'll just have to live with the situation. good luck amending the Constitution to give DC representation in the Senate.

Posted by: transplant2 | April 27, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Sure hope this will extend to the Capitol complex too. I mean, hey, if it's good enough for Shaw and Tenleytown and Brightwood, it's good enough for Cannon and Russell and the rotunda too, right?

Posted by: 20009matt | April 27, 2010 9:40 PM | Report abuse

In effect, every member of Congress represents DC.

Posted by: Oracle3 | April 27, 2010 6:42 PM

Until it comes to doing constituent service or, you know, representing our interests.

Posted by: 20009matt | April 27, 2010 9:54 PM | Report abuse

If DC citizens don't think they should have to obey the constitution they are obviously unfit to have the right to vote. If there is any place in this country where my rights should be sacred it is DC.
I bet these same mental deficients think Arizona shouldn't be able to ENFORCE the law.

Posted by: CCRyder1 | April 28, 2010 7:02 AM | Report abuse

Tell congress to mind it's own business. They treat the District like it's their personal plantation.
Posted by: jckdoors

That's because the District is a Plantation. Have you been to SouthEast? There are a million plantation workers running around with nothing to do.

Posted by: AlbyVA | April 28, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Good for the two Senators.

In DC we used to foolishly have very strict gun laws. That resulted in the criminals having guns, but not law abiding citizens.

We had a very high murder rate. The gun laws were useless.

Now criminals do not know what to expect when choosing which house to break into. They may get a piece of lead in the head if they pick the wrong house.

We do not need statehood. We struggle to function as a city much less a state.

After this past year we do not need two more Democrats in the Senate, nor a voting member in the House.

The Congress is currently ignoring the citizens that actually contribute to society, so I do not favor adding to the mess with more looney Democrats on the Hill.

Posted by: get8329 | April 28, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

DrewCourtney -

At what point did the DC Counsel decide that people living within the boundaries of the District should not have the right to keep and bear arms? More impotantly, at what point is it acceptable for the DC Counsel to establish what rights should and should not be protected by the Constitution?

Posted by: Disbelief | April 28, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

While this is a long-shot, I applaud this type of action wherever it originates because it continues the gradual trend in this country toward allowing law abiding citizens to exercise our second amendment right to own, carry and protect ourselves and others with firearms. I am so tired of organizations and individuals who many times successfully attempt to restrict that right by mandating 'registration' or other prohibitive interference in legal firearm ownership as if it were a privilege like automobile driving where registration and control is appropriate and not a true personal right.

I am disturbed by the amount of violence by criminals using guns in our country, but have enough sense and awareness to realize that these tragic illegal acts could be accomplished even with the most restrictive gun laws in place. People who are intent on accomplishing criminal acts will always be able to acquire a gun... always. Having more gun control laws will have no affect on tragedies like Columbine or Virginia Tech; they will only restrict law-abiding citizens from legal gun ownership.

There is overwhelming empirical data and information which concludes that legal gun ownership and conceal carry laws uniformly have had the effect of reducing gun crime and violence in this country, but these facts are not widely known by the general public because of anti-gun sentiment of print and broadcast outlet owners, producers and talent.

The good news, however, is that many state legislations over the last decade have enacted 'right to carry' and 'concealed carry weapons' (CCW) laws that have gone a long way to restoring second amendment rights to the citizens of those states. In all instances where these states enacted laws that support our second amendment right to gun ownership the rate of gun related violence and crime, including homicide, suicide and accidental death, has declined in the years following enactment.

I live in Virginia where there are reasonable laws supporting legal gun ownership but work in DC spending 10 to 14 hours per day during the week. The gun ban in DC, even prior to the Supreme Court decision on 'Heller' in 2008 did not prevent me from seeing evening news reports of gun violence and death on a daily basis for the 30 years I've lived in the metropolitan area. Support for legal gun ownership by law-abiding residents will reduce the incidence of gun crime and violence in DC. It is time for a change!

Posted by: k9lover2b | April 28, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

since the police can't clean up DC, maybe if they let the honest citizens carry there would be far less robberies and homicides. look at arlington and alexandria, we pack all day there legally and have no problems with rif-raf. it's all in PG and DC, aka the hood. those 5 kids that were killed by the AK-47, that rifle was stolen from MD. criminals steal their guns and then steal from you.

Posted by: mrjohner | April 28, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

It's about time we scrape off all this Liberal nonsense and get back to being America.

D.C. is not a state and never will be. It is our Capitol City.

Posted by: flynny | April 28, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

I'm having trouble finding the right words to explain how angry I am about this. What the hell gives them the right to make this decision for us? Who the hell do they think they are? The Court made its decision, and we're complying with it. These Senators, who are merely grandstanding for the NRA, could care less. They don't even know if we WANT this. And they wouldn't stand for it if it was the other way around. This is beyond hypocrisy - this is un-American.

Posted by: ravensfan20008 | April 28, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Here is the truth:

Criminals in DC will carry guns regardless. Look at Chicago. Chicago has a gun ban, and there is tons of crime. DC had a gun ban and it had tons of crime. Criminals will carry guns because THEY ARE CRIMINALS. CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY THE LAW.

Criminals come to DC because of it's strict gun laws. They know that people cannot defend themselves. If you were a criminal, would you want to rob someone who you know doesn't have a gun or someone who may.

The only guns your putting on the street are for honest citizens to stand up against crime. Criminals will continue to bring guns in regardless of the law.

I wish liberals would understand this isn't about putting guns on the street for crime. That is already a problem. One need only look at the evidence for states with heavy gun control vs states with minor gun control.

I was a tried and true anti-gun liberal, until I looked at those facts, and I realized I was wrong. I'm still a liberal, but I support gun rights.

Posted by: thewhitrbbit | April 28, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution grants Congress, not the D.C. Council, authority over the District of Columbia's affairs.

Should Congress pass restrictions on the District's ability to enact gun control legislation, this wouldn't be the first time it has restricted the council's powers. As another commenter pointed out, the District is prohibited from levying a commuter tax on non-District residents who work in the city.

By the way, if D.C. Council members, Mayor Fenty, Del. Norton, and others are so upset about "taxation without representation," they should ask why the council didn't permit District residents to vote on whether to legalize same-sex marriage, which has been rejected so far by the voters of 31 states.

Posted by: austinrl | April 28, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

"Tell congress to mind it's own business. They treat the District like it's their personal plantation."

But DC *is* the "personal-plantation" of Congress. If Congress wanted to, they could turn the entire city into a massive American Kremlin.

Would be kinda cool, actually.

Posted by: dubya1938 | April 28, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Good. Criminals don't care about gun laws and will carry them anyway. The only things that gun laws do, are restrict the law abiding citizing the ability to protect itself from the lawless that DC so loves.

Posted by: kenayers1 | April 28, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: csanfordivy | April 28, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

It's about time we scrape off all this Liberal nonsense and get back to being America.

D.C. is not a state and never will be. It is our Capitol City.

Posted by: flynny | April 28, 2010 3:31 PM

HEY...where do you live, so we can move the capitol city to your nighborhood..thus taking away your individual rights as an American Citizen...that all other citizens in the US share...even those who are illigal get better justice than those who are DC residents (in that the elected voice of that state, still speak for them)...Now what do you think of that!!..Care to move to DC and forfiet your rights...I bet you won't..just sit back on the sidelines and be a critic..All I ask is to have the same natural born rights and voice that you that so wrong!!!..the Constitution after all was written as follows: "We the people, For the people and by the people" Let us not forget that those who reside in DC and ANY OTHER STATE IN THE GREAT UNION...MAKE UP THAT VERY PHRASE!!! Thank you for your opinion but your vote to give me full representation would be much appriciated as well.

Posted by: csanfordivy | April 28, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

After watching the video of the Oaf Keepers and their Open Carry Rally in Virginia. DC should do everyting in it's power to keep these nuts out.

Posted by: envcontractor | April 28, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

I find it strange that those who are rightly concerned over the wrongful denial of voting rights to DC residents (Republicans have been particularly and unforgivably cynical on this issue) so often fail to be concerned at the even more egregious denial of the much more fundamental right to self defense. This right was not granted by the 2nd amendment -- in fact, the founding fathers were very clear that it pre-dates the constitution. It's one of those inalienable rights, remember? People supporting DCs anti gun laws shoudl sit down and dispassionately consult the data. These show that the kind of gun laws DC has (and Chicago, and NY) accomplish only one thing -- they restrict access to guns by law abiding citizens. They do little or nothing to restrict access to weapons by criminals, and indeed, create for them a "preferred hunting" zone by reducing the probability the victim they select will be armed and ready to defend him/herself.

I am a staunch supporter of DC voting rights. But one of the reasons I refuse to live in the district is because it fails to respect my right to self defense. Folks who think they have the prerogative to negate one's right to self defense have shown they do not respect fundamental rights of the individual. What next -- will they try to deny voting rights to gun owners? They've shown they are not, in principle, opposed to more serious transgressions. Hard to be too sympathetic.

Posted by: coyote53 | April 28, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

If the DC govt doesn't trust it's residents with guns I do not trust them with a vote

Posted by: hvymax | April 28, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

I do not trust anyone to vote that I would not trust with a gun. A vote can be more dangerous than a gun.

Posted by: hvymax | April 28, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

"HEY...where do you live, so we can move the capitol city to your nighborhood..thus taking away your individual rights as an American Citizen..."

Please stop with the nonsense.
Read the Constitution, and either stay in DC or move. Period.

Thank yew.

Posted by: dubya1938 | April 28, 2010 9:41 PM | Report abuse

So look at China where the don't allow any guns... but criminals now use kitchen knives to slaughter children!

Gun control laws don't work and only prevent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves... and perpetuating the violence and murder rate in DC...

Posted by: k9lover2b | April 29, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Plantation mentality?

Hey DC hoplophobes - you're right. You ARE on a plantation. Do you know how you can tell?

Because only FREE people own guns. Slaves don't.

May the chains of your self-imposed bondage weigh softly on your shoulders as you cower at the feet of your Government masters.

Posted by: ThreePercent | April 30, 2010 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Why is this even an issue? Even the Clinton administration's study showed firearms are used 50 times more often in self defense than to commit crimes, and they were trying to refute another study that said the number was 80 times more often). Imagine moms being able to defend themselves and their kids from carjackers and kidnappers--like they can in most other states. Maybe Virginians know something DC doesn't. Never mind that our right to the means of self defense is enumerated in the constitution.

Posted by: memerider | May 1, 2010 2:10 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company