Yesterday's majority opinion said that the District has a right to regulate and require the registration of firearms but not to ban them in homes. The ruling also struck down a section of the D.C. law that required owners of registered guns, including shotguns, to disassemble them or use trigger locks, saying that would render the weapons useless. [snip]RCP Blog with commentary and links. The opinion here.
In a footnote, Silberman noted that "the black market for handguns in the District is so strong that handguns are readily available (probably at little premium) to criminals. It is asserted, therefore, that the D.C. gun control laws irrationally prevent only law abiding citizens from owning handguns."
A few shock waves may be felt here in Wilmette among backers of the local ban. But others of us have been shocked by the rise in crime, locally and nationally, and a few recent and not-so-recent incidents in Wilmette, which apparently has put out a welcome mat for criminals.
And as those opposed to this ban have stated, why shouldn't the courts apply the Second Amendment much like the First, providing an individual right rather than a collective one?
Perhaps next time a father like Hale DeMar, who may have saved his children's lives that night by having a handgun, won't be charged with a crime by his village. We value our police, but they may not be able to help us all in time, and advice like "locking your bedroom door", given at the time by the police chief, is small comfort.
And women living alone have protected themselves with hanguns. More from the Second Amendment Sisters.
It always amazes me that here in one of the most well-educated zip codes in the country, liberals don't trust their neighbors to handle their lives and their guns responsibly. But that's the liberal nanny state mentality. They know what's good for us.
No comments:
Post a Comment