Constitutional rights might invade D.C.

I now have the privilege in introducing DAVE who is thinking of joining us as part of the ‘Grok crew. Based on this piece, I think he’ll fit in just dandy! So please, be nice to him, on this, his first try! -Skip

=================================================================

DC city hall bureaucrats are shaking in their federal government subsidized boots again.

Today, the Supreme Court is expected to state whether or not they will hear an appeal regarding DC’s long-standing ban of personal firearms. Back in March, a DC appellate court ruled that the 1976 ban on handguns in the District was in violation of the Second Amendment.

Oddly enough, the March suit was brought forth not by a big time gun company or a conservative activist group; but by a federal worker. Dick Anthony Heller, a security guard at a federal building brought forth the lawsuit to the DC appellate court in hopes that he could gain the right to keep his firearm at his home for personal protection.

DC, which has its very own massive federal appropriation to help feed its gluttonous diet for erroneous and failed government programs, hasn’t seemed to have curbed crime after almost three decades of banned firearms in the District. In fact, while the national homicide rate has fallen by 2% since the 76’ ban, DC’s actually rose.

John Lott from the National Review Online writes:

Crime rose significantly after the gun ban went into effect. In the five years before Washington’s ban in 1976, the murder rate fell from 37 to 27 per 100,000. In the five years after it went into effect, the murder rate rose back up to 35. During this same time, robberies fell from 1,514 to 1,003 per 100,000 and then rose by over 63 percent, up to 1,635. The five-year trends are not some aberration. In fact, while murder rates have varied over time, during the almost 30 years since the ban, the murder rate has only once fallen below what it was in 1976.

The same folks who can’t operate public schools believe they are also correct in their livid protection
of the gun ban. This case could be a bummer for the DC ruling class.

The USA Today reports:

Based on prior rulings, a trial court threw out Heller’s case. When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reversed the ruling in March, it emphasized the Second Amendment’s

"right of the people" phrase and stressed that a right to arms existed when the new government

was formed.

Judge Laurence Silberman, writing for the 2-to-1 panel, said the "individual right … existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense."

Obviously, the liberal intelligentsia is about to panic, and it’s not so surprising that national media outlets reported this story onMonday with an alarmist tones in the writing.

It’s also interesting to predict if the 2nd Amendment will become a reasonably important issue in 2008. I doubt voters or candidates will make an issue out of it unless another school shooting or mass murder shocks the nation. However, I can’t wait to see the laughable photo-ops as primped politicians awkwardly hold guns as if they were dirty-diapered babies to woo conservative voters.

Hopefully, the SC will hear this case and bring a little New Hampshire know-how to the inner beltway. During my time working in the District after college, people were sometimes in awe that I came from a state where you can carry a gun in public simply by paying $10 and filling out a short form at your local police department.

Yes, not only did I come from a land where men can protect themselves and their families, but also a place where arena-sized discount liquor outlets flank each side of Interstate 95 on the border, there’s no state income tax, and up until a few years ago, my father did yard work in overalls with no shirt on. Thank God I grew up in a quiet dead-end neighborhood.

Author

X Facebook Telegram