Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Gun rights in action

By Tom Toles



You can't be serious

The sketch I put up today (not the main cartoon, the rough sketch after the jump -- I know, it's complicated) deals with the seriousness of the Tea Party types. Lord knows their anger is real, but are their ideas? Getting angry is a fine, traditional American pastime, and we're all for those. The whole system is designed to register and deal with what citizens are concerned about. But what ARE these citizens concerned about?

First, we must put aside the question of race, both the president's and any possible beneficiaries of the president's policies. I don't know how anyone could look at the history of conservatism over the last, oh, FOREVER, and conclude that race could possibly have anything to do with anything.

No, the anger has to do with OTHER things, like deficits. Deficits, like all accounting issues, are well known to get people massively worked up. Look at the furious way Americans respond when someone offers them the opportunity to buy on credit. And deficits particularly matter when one party is in office and not that other party, but we won't name names here.

But being mad at deficits is not a policy. A policy means you look at how to fix the problem. The problem in the deficit, long term, is rising medical costs. Okay, you want to insist that Obama's health-care plan will raise costs rather than lower them. Debatable point. Probably wrong, but debatable. But if it doesn't lower them, what does? If your answer is leaving more and more people without coverage, and care, say so. But say something. The shot clock on being angry without a plan, and being taken seriously, is running out.

--Tom Toles



By Tom Toles  | April 1, 2010; 12:00 AM ET
Categories:  Guns, Supreme Court  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Steele shackles
Next: The tears of a cartoonist

Other Syndicated Editorial Cartoons:


There is no hatred like the hatred coming from the far left, e.g. if you disagree with President Obama, you must be a racist. According to them,you couldn't possibly have an honest disagreement with his policies.

Posted by: gharding1 | April 7, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

If the whole point of getting people riled is to win votes, then having a logical reason for the anger is counter-productive. Logic might cause them to vote against you.
Obamacare is socialism! (Logic: How is it politically different from hundreds of other programs that we all endorse, such as mandatory vaccinations against polio, small pox and TB?)
I like what I have, leave it alone! (Logic: Without serious reforms, increasing medical costs will force companies to quit providing "free" coverage.)
Your taxes will go up. (Logic: Taxes are the only way government has to pay its obligations under medicare/medicaid. Serious reform will reduce some of the increases.)
Obamacare steals from your children. (Logic: Anytime the government spends what it does not have, then the future will be responsible for paying. The Iraq war added up to $3 trillion to our children's debt, and the tea partiers said not a word. At least serious health care reform has the potential to reduce some of the future costs.)

Posted by: gss49 | April 2, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

I love your humor and the straight to the gut way you focus on the issue. People can say they don't like you or that they don't share your views, but I notice not many say you are wrong.

Posted by: gdwtch52 | April 2, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse


I appreciate your view that a broad health care policy is not bad. It should be the domain of each state and not the Federal government.

I think if some to the left would listen to this reasoning they would not be so quick to condemn the right.

In addition, imagine if all 50 state were challenged to provide health care for their residents. 50 experiments. Some will fail however others will find a solution that will provide for the health needs of the people. Those successes will be adopted by states who are not as efficient.

Dare I surmise; delivering health care to all.

Posted by: brent6 | April 2, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

So the left is still says the right does not have any solutions to the above. The answers are clear to anyone who wishes to listen, but I will try to spell them out here as best I can; but first, recognize that these signs are not tea party signs but rather a leftists attack against tea partiers, so I will merely address the issues.

Medicare and Social Security:
Our country is going bankrupt because of these two programs (coupled with the killing of 50 million of our 'next generation'). The FEDERAL government does not have any Constitutional authority to run these types of programs. The logical solution is to have the federal government pay the state governments the balance of what is in the trust funds and then to terminate these programs. The states should then be free to set up whatever program they wish with the trust fund money and taxes - 50 experiments in how to handle the problem!

Farm Subsidies:
Are you seriously suggesting that farm subsidies are good? Yes, eliminate them - free the people from the bondage of economic slavery to the government!

Financial Regulation:
Let the free market work - AND just like personal freedom, the maintenance of a free market requires a basic level of policing. For example, policing is needed to prevent fraud, monopolies, collusion, etc. A free market also does not provide government incentives to lend money to people who cannot afford to pay them back. The predictable result of that abusive policy was a market boom followed by a market collapse, whereupon the government decided to steal the wealth of our children so that we could continue our opulent spending. The Tea Party movement wants us to live within our means; failure to do so is not only unethical, it is unwise as it will ultimately result in total economic collapse - at the current pace, probably by 2016.

Read the Constitution, the Executive Branch is not allowed to make laws. If you want to impose laws, go through the Constitutional process, which means that the issue also has to be defined as an interstate issue if it is to be a federal law. Otherwise, work through the states; allowing 50 state experiments will result in a MUCH stronger and freer Union.

Posted by: kentx6 | April 2, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

geonan1: Don't just let your subscription lapse. Make sure you send back a blank subscription card with a short and pithy note explaining WHY you are dropping their rag.

Posted by: JimInHouston1 | April 2, 2010 7:53 AM | Report abuse

The tards sure do love their guns, don't they? Almost as much as they love Jesus and Sarah Palin.

Posted by: ottoparts | April 1, 2010 11:29 PM | Report abuse

"Due to the extreme lack of honesty and poor judgement by both the cartoonist and Washington Post in publishing this cartoon, the next time I receive a renewal statement from the Washington Post, I'll let my subscription lapse."

I wish I had a subscription to let lapse. However, I already dropped my NYT subscription after 30 years of continuous sponsorship. I told them that I found their lack of objectivity to have reached irresponsible levels. The Houston Chronicle will be dumped soon for the same reason. Thank goodness for the Wall Street Journal.

Posted by: JimInHouston1 | April 1, 2010 10:52 PM | Report abuse

Due to the extreme lack of honesty and poor judgement by both the cartoonist and Washington Post in publishing this cartoon, the next time I receive a renewal statement from the Washington Post, I'll let my subscription lapse.

Posted by: geonan1 | April 1, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE!! You got a bunch of folks shot and some shot dead in the Capitol of the U.S. that is Washington D.C. The white dudes that just got busted for mouthing off and running around in green suits in the woods with guns got big headlines. Most sane Americans were outraged and satisfied that Homeland Security and the FBI were doing their jobs. Where are the headlines here and the interviews about what is being done-- in emergency mode-- to cope with this type of Terrorism in our Nations Capitol.

Terrorism in the Nations Capitol is not acceptable, end of story. OR, am I not understanding that someone that makes threats against Government is a huge danger and someone that simply kills other someones, but does not make threats against the Government, is not a danger. I guess there is a destinction.

If we view Middle Eastern extremist groups that kill US Citizens as terrorists, If we view White Christian extremist groups that talk of attacking the Government as terrorists, is it not clear that anyone intending or committing mass murder is a terrorist?

Black kids killing Black kids appears to not concern the white/black Washington elite ruling class. Where is the outrage that 1/8th of our population lives in insanity, war zones that have no barbed wire but are just as inescapable. Enslaved by drugs and encased by apathy, ignorance, and hatred.

We can not have a secure Homeland with lawless borders that import drugs and criminal instability that have our children and young adults in chaos. We can not have a secure Homeland if we do not make a National priority of pacification of gangs regardless of creed or color or religion. We can not have Homeland Security with fear and terror being a part of the daily life of many of our Citizens.

These people indeed have a right to Life, Liberity , and Persuit of Happyness. They are denied those rights

Posted by: onlooker2 | April 1, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

SterlingNorth, thanks for the thoughtful reply.

My point being even regulation cannot stop criminal intent any more than taking away a driver's license can stop someone from driving again.

Using 'gun control' to limit crime, to me, is a red herring.

Posted by: brent6 | April 1, 2010 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Treason Dis Arming We the people is Adding the Foe
*** H.R. 2159, the Disarming American Citizens Act allowing anti-gun Attorney General Eric Holder to revoke the Second Amendment rights of ANY American he chooses based on pure “suspicion”;

*** A new so-called “Assault Weapons” Ban, targeting ALL semi-automatic rifles and shotguns -- which, unlike the Clinton ban, will NEVER expire;

*** H.R. 45, the “Catch-All” Obama Gun Control Bill, which would create a national gun registry, require a two-day waiting period, hike taxes on gun sales, federally ban ALL private firearms sales, and FORCE you to take a written exam just to prove you’re “fit” to own a firearm;

*** The U.N.’s so-called “Small Arms Treaty,” which would confiscate and destroy ALL “unauthorized” civilian firearms and set the stage for INTERNATIONAL gun confiscation.
This is Constitutional contempt, Degradation of duty of the Oath of office, Suit them out Use Sanctum Mcgallium an U.S. Title 42 usc section 1983. Flood the small claims courts LaPierre At The McDonald Case Oral Arguments.xml
Dudley Brown
Executive Director
National Association for Gun Rights

Posted by: WindSong | April 1, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

"I'm not advocating automobile or aircraft control laws. I'm just saying."

...but we already do have automobile and aircraft control laws. I'm sure you're somewhat aware of them. Isn't one aspect of which being that you need to possess a little laminated card issued by the government to operate one or the other? In fact, I even hear they can take away your 'right' to operate an automobile and/or aircraft if say you cause too much harm with one or the other. Of course, neither right is enshrined with its own amendment in the Bill of Rights, but that amendment is not the most crystal clear. Of course, even the most maximalist viewing of the amendment wouldn't suggest that you can't have laws saying six year olds shouldn't be sold a firearm.

Posted by: SterlingNorth | April 1, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

I look for two things in a political cartoonist. Excellent artwork and a canny, spot on take on an issue. I am waiting Mr. Toles.

Posted by: bobbo2 | April 1, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

It's supposed to be "its".

Posted by: dlowell63 | April 1, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Angry yes, because everything is rotten. They’ve been given the shaft for 30 years by the rich ruling class who has been fighting a vicious class war against them. Look at wages, jobs, healthcare, education they all suck. Of course the propaganda blames them (working/middle class) and they believe it! If only they would work harder they can rise up to their level. Its BS. Get angry and tell them you want single payer so that we’re not wage slaves to a company cause of so called health insurance which when you are really sick find out it aint there either….

Posted by: Hello_earth | April 1, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

This is a must read for both sides of the 2nd Amendment debate.,0,5647468.story

Thanks to the Chicago Tribune for printing this commentary.

Posted by: apspa1 | April 1, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Oh yes it must be the guns fault again. The Swiss have automatic weapons and the least murder in the world; nope the problem can't be the people themselves has to be them evil guns.

Posted by: flonzy3 | April 1, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

When I read Toles' cartoon with the signs I clearly see his point. When I view the same cartoon from the point of view of F. Bastiat (Google Bastiat The Law pdf) I see a complete and rational point of view - from the Tea side of things.

I'm tending towards the Tea point of view for several rational reasons. Mostly from the social philosophy of Bastiat and his peers. Not from sign-waving crowds of any ilk.

Posted by: brent6 | April 1, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

bobmoses asks
"What exactly is one to say to signs that don't reflect anyone's views?"

That is the point. If the view is "Government is the problem, but don't touch my medicare," there's an inherent conflict in those positions. Toles is saying its easy to be mad, but its not as easy to actually solve problems.

Take the EPA sign. Again, if the view is "Government is bad, eliminate the EPA," what would the impact be? Presumably a resumption in unlimited release of untreated waste into our water and air. Sure, we'd all save money, but we'd be drinking and breathing more pollutants. Is that a worthwhile tradeoff? Is that really what the Tea people / small government conservatives are for?

Posted by: bsimon1 | April 1, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Perfection comes from corralling the masses into neat uniform actions. Guns are an icon against social management, nothing more.

The truth be told, a person could do more carnal damage with an automobile or an aircraft than with a handgun.

I'm not advocating automobile or aircraft control laws. I'm just saying.

Posted by: brent6 | April 1, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

"I'm a liberal and agree with Toles about the Tea Partiers - I notice none of them comment on the actual substance of the placards in his sketch."

What exactly is one to say to signs that don't reflect anyone's views? I notice that you chose not to comment on them. If that is some indicator of having substance, why have you not done so?

Posted by: bobmoses | April 1, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Wow, you mean liberals think the tea partiers are racists who have no legitimate policy views?

Toles needed four paragraphs to say that? What a waste. We already knew that liberals like Toles are so intolerant of other views that they have to see folks in that way.

Posted by: bobmoses | April 1, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

As for "original intent", maybe it wasn't so far away from the scene in the cartoon.

Perhaps Toles forgets that one of the most prominent founding fathers, Alexander Hamilton, was killed in a duel by the vice-president of the United States.

Posted by: kevrobb | April 1, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

I'm a liberal and agree with Toles about the Tea Partiers - I notice none of them comment on the actual substance of the placards in his sketch.

But it's nonsensical and anti-logical to argue that these drive-by murders make a strong case for local gun control. In fact they prove how irrelevant it is.

Gun murders and murder generally vary sharply across the US, but one factor they clearly don't depend on, if you analyse the statistics, is local gun laws.

As somebody notes above, DC has a much lower murder rate today than it did when gun laws were stricter there.

As somebody else notes, the difference between DC and Virginia is far better explained by education than by gun laws.

When people like Toles spout off about the 2nd Amendment, they create a very unusual situation - one in which conservatives are actually on the side of right and logic.

They also harm the liberal cause, because nothing does more in America to strengthen the conservative movement than the perception that liberals are after their guns.

Gun control is a dead issue. Do the smart thing, as the Democratic party has done, and just drop it.

Posted by: kevrobb | April 1, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Mr Toles, like all anti-rights crusaders out to make the world a better place, doesn't seem to understand that murder is still illegal. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with authorizing murder, but that escapes the crowd who function on emotion rather than reason. Or, in the case of grown men who make their livings by drawing clever little cartoons, exploiting emotions.

Posted by: Major94 | April 1, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

>Clearly, the city should have never legalized AK-47-style >assault rifles like the one used in the recent shooting.

Sorry, no such thing. Semiautos are NOT assault weapons, no matter how many times you repeat the phrase. The Special Forces, Secret Service, etc. use weapons capable of fully automatic fire (e. g., the MP5 or the Uzzi and others). No assault team leader would limit his people to a semi-auto weapon.

This kind of deliberate mis-labeling happens on The Right, too: witness use of the term 'partial birth abortion' to refer to the D&C procedure. The objective is to demonize and short-circuit the thinking process.

Posted by: jalee30663 | April 1, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

"Tolls saying republicans have been racist forever is just a very poorly educated man spouting off."

I had a feeling he wasn't very well educated. In fact I recall an interview he did where he confessed to having gone k-8 at a Catholic School near Buffalo. I'm surprised he can show his face at the Post. Oh, the shame of it all.

Posted by: dudeupnorth | April 1, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

"Tolls saying republicans have been racist forever is just a very poorly educated man spouting off. Just google al gore senior, robert byrd, the republican party before during and after the civil war."

A reading of Lincoln's First Inaugural reminds us that he was promising not to touch slavery in those states where it existed. As the first of our GOP presidents, that's (his) hardly building a case for the rights of black folks of a pre-War 1861.

Posted by: dudeupnorth | April 1, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

"First, we must put aside the question of race, both the president's and any possible beneficiaries of the president's policies."

Anytime I've seen pix of Tea Partiers, there are always dozens of dark faces in the crowd. So wussup with that?

Posted by: dudeupnorth | April 1, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Tom Toles as typical of leftists want you to look the other way. Toles accusing the tea party people of being racist although there is no evidence to that despited the 9 different cameras filming the black caucas deliberetly confronting the protestors to try and get a response. They didn't so they made it up.

Toles wants you to look the other way because of the recent arrest of a racist anti semetic Obama supporter/donor by the FBI for threating to put a bullet in the head of Jewish Republican congressman Eric Cantor.

He also doesn't want you to look at yesterdays Obama supporters gunning each other down in the streets of Washington D. C. 9 people in all injured and killed.

Tolls saying republicans have been racist forever is just a very poorly educated man spouting off. Just google al gore senior, robert byrd, the republican party before during and after the civil war.

Posted by: robtr | April 1, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Based on the comments in the WaPo discussion threads, leaving people without coverage seems to be exactly what they are in favor of. Darwinian as hell -- and so odd, considering that Christian conservatives claim to believe in God and Jesus, not Darwin, and anyone who's read the New Testament knows that leaving people to die in ditches is not Jesus's first choice.

But when it comes to THEIR MONEY (which is the real subject of the New Testament, BTW), it becomes pretty clear that Jesus doesn't rank very high for the angry right. The final joke is on them, because we ALREADY pay for the uninsured, by absorbing the costs of unreimbursed health care through medical fees and therefore through our insurance costs -- and as Gail Collins noted today in her NYT column, Romney ran his Massachusetts health-care-mandate plan on a "no more free rides" slogan.

The absurd has finally triumphed.

Posted by: herzliebster | April 1, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Stick to cartooning, Tom....... your commentary clearly demonstrates you are living in the typical liberal fantasy world. That AK-47 couldn't hurt anybody, without a idiot PERSON to pull the trigger.

Posted by: Shrimper | April 1, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse
YES exactly what we are worried about..
AND you guys are PULLING the Triggers
and hitting citizens

Posted by: Fei_Hu | April 1, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Stick to cartooning, Tom....... your commentary clearly demonstrates you are living in the typical liberal fantasy world. That AK-47 couldn't hurt anybody, without a idiot PERSON to pull the trigger.

As for the sketch, more typical distortion and extremism in an effort to paint the Tea Party PATRIOTS in a negative light. You know that the heart of opposition to the sainted BHO and his marxist/socialist buds, is the full-on assault on our founding principles and institutions. Big government takeovers and control of every aspect of life may be appealing to you as a liberal drone, but free thinking, independent people that actually LOVE their country find this march toward socialist/totalitarian utopia UNACCEPTABLE and DANGEROUS. And for that ingrate hypocrite Obama to basically spit in the face of the country that bestrowed upon him the most prestigious, powerful leadership position in the world, is beyond contempt. You are right the Tea Party folks are angry..... they have every right to be ..... arrogance from our so-called "representatives" will do that to you.

Posted by: Shrimper | April 1, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse

The Tea Party has NO REPRESENTATION in congress. Not one Senator, not one Congressman. The Tea party cannot lobby or throw millions of dollars at issue ads.

The people in power, Democrats and Republicans, especially the Democrats, are SCARED to death of the Tea party. So much so that they have literally enlisted every available left wing resource to malign it. Here at the WaPo, the typical Post Toasties like Dione, Capehart, and Robinson have been ripping on the Tea party several times a week. The WaPo has a spent more money on ink writing about the Tea Party than the Tea Party has spent on rallies.

The other side, the Republicans, just want to co-opt the Tea party. For now. But they fear it as much as the Democrats.

People are searching for a way to get their voice heard. The current two party system has failed, and people are ready to throw it off and put their efforts into a system. a party, that speaks for them.

This causes those in power, those with all the power, to get nervous. And when those in power get nervous, bad things happen. Do you think King George had good things to say about American Colonist? Did he listen to reason? No. And I don't expect anything different now.

Whether the Tea party is co-opted, or killed in it's infancy, the people are going to find a way out of this corrupt system.

Posted by: mdsinc | April 1, 2010 8:18 AM | Report abuse

The author of the article says, "Okay, you want to insist that Obama's health-care plan will raise costs rather than lower them. Debatable point."

Not sure what remains that is so "debatable". Can we assume that putting another 30 million people into the healthcare system "raises costs"? I'd say so.

Can we assume that barring insurance companies from denying those with pre-existing conditions raises costs? You bet, especially since many folks will now opt to not buy insurance until they really need it. Insurance prices will skyrocket.

The Tea Party folks have a lot of sound debate issues; it is their opposition that generally has no arguments, but just emotional outbursts.

Posted by: RealTexan1 | April 1, 2010 8:13 AM | Report abuse

If we're all being gassed we will have no need for health care or guns. It's all beginning to look like a dead issue no matter which one is debated!

Posted by: wildernesslight | April 1, 2010 8:04 AM | Report abuse

Thank you, Mr. Toles. The explanation was helpful. The sketch was brilliant...Beyond your usual great job, sir!

Posted by: malvo1 | April 1, 2010 7:12 AM | Report abuse

The Post loves to condemn the Tea Party in every way; rather than listening to the Tea Partiers, the Post is more interested in trying to figure out ways to misrepresent their views to make them look violent, despite the fact that no violence is being generated from them.

To complete the cycle of hypocrisy, the Post then chooses to print a "cartoon" that depicts a mass of bullets flying towards the (supposedly) conservative Supreme Court. Are you suggesting assassinations? I assume not - but this is the exact type of logic that is used condemn Sarah Palin and her "targeting" congressional seats. This double standard is shameful.

BTW: Since you haven't bothered to investigate, the Tea Party movement actually started with the TARP bailout that was led by a Republican President - demonstrating that most Tea Partiers are fed up with both Dems and Repubs.

TARP was the turning point because it marked a shift from merely irresponsible spending to unsustainable spending. Annual deficits went from roughly 2-3% of GDP (i.e., roughly equal to long-term growth rates and therefore sustainable in theory) and jumped to 8-12% of GDP (clearly unsustainable). What is shocking is that all of the Dems that complained about the deficits for the past 8 years are now fine with deficits that are 4 times larger!

As far as the solution is concerned, the answer is simple - and widely available to anyone actually interested in listening. Return to liberty as envisioned by our Constitution. Remove power from the federal government and return it to the state government. Tie authority to spend to responsibility for results by not bailing out failing corporations, states, or individuals. If you want health care work for it (or convince your state government to provide it - and allow people who value their liberty to flee your tyranny by moving to another state). This is the TRUE American spirit - it is called the work ethic.

Posted by: kentx6 | April 1, 2010 7:02 AM | Report abuse

PS: When they aren't busy shooting junk, they are busy shooting each other. It's easier being a gang banger thug until it isn't. These people actually are fed in prison. They got rights and all that. Cheaper to install gas shower stalls and cremation chambers.

Posted by: tossnokia | April 1, 2010 5:58 AM | Report abuse

We got new stuff to kill with and it's more deadly than guns. Guns are recreational fun. If you want lots of people dead, you need more exotic hardware. I won't shoot you, I'll just make you wish that's all I did and then the last person leaving the building can turn the lights off and Operation All-Gone is complete. I'm working off a General Grant system and trying to make a killing here. You are losing a million dollars a day and are about to be flat-lined. Shoot yourself in the head. I'm not wasting my ammo on you. I have the bullets and the other guy has the gun.

Posted by: tossnokia | April 1, 2010 5:49 AM | Report abuse

The Second Amendment is about the right to have a gun. What a person does with it is subject to laws and one should be responsible.

This cartoon is a joke - if you call needless death funny. Not part of a serious discussion, to be sure.

Posted by: gary4books | April 1, 2010 5:33 AM | Report abuse

Those cute little signs look like a veiled attempt to scare and demagogue those citizens who disagree with all those liberal wealth confiscating ideas and this evidently makes you very, very angry.

Posted by: Champions | April 1, 2010 4:42 AM | Report abuse

Clearly, the city should have never legalized AK-47-style assault rifles like the one used in the recent shooting.

Wait, what's that you say? Such weapons are still illegal in the district? Well then, I'm shocked that today's drive-by shooters have such a blatant disregard for the law!

Posted by: Simon23p | April 1, 2010 2:29 AM | Report abuse

i9 guess the gun caption should read black birth control

Posted by: dagner49 | April 1, 2010 1:38 AM | Report abuse

Those fire fights in Southeast happened more often when all the guns were banned. The fact is DC has had a lower murder rate today which just happens to coincide with the time when citizens could exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. There are more guns per capita just across the river in Virginia, but no fire fights happen like the recent one in DC so it just can't be the guns, maybe the education?

Posted by: carbonhog | March 31, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company