One of the nice things about living in the greater Washington, DC, area is that you never lack for stupid things on which to comment in your blog. It doesn't quite compensate for the traffic, the cost of living, and the summer heat and humidity, but it helps.
For today's example of Stupidity In Action, I call your attention to this article from this morning's Washington Post: "D.C. Is Sued Again Over Handgun Rules."
It seems that the gentleman who filed the lawsuit which led to the recent Supreme Court decision overturning D.C.'s ban on the ownership of handguns is back in court with yet another lawsuit. This time, Mr Heller is claiming that the new gun-registration system proposed in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling is burdensome and continues to illegally outlaw most semiautomatic pistols.
Let me say up front that I agree with Mr Heller's basic point. If you accept the argument that handguns are necessary for self-defense in D.C., then regulations which require you to keep your gun disassembled, equipped with a trigger lock, and/or unloaded rather defeat the purpose of having it in the first place...after all, if some coked-up ass clown breaks into your home, he's unlikely to wait for you to reassemble, unlock, and load your gun so you can shoot him before he does you ill. In this sense, the new D.C. gun laws are clearly unconstitutional, not to mention silly.
On the other hand, I really have a hard time believing that pumping more legal guns into D.C. to counteract the illegal ones already there is really going to help. I think the more likely long-term result will be more self-inflicted injuries and people using guns to settle domestic disputes. And more guns certainly won't protect us from the legal armed robbery that goes on in the halls of Congress and the office buildings along K Street, anyhow.
Another long-term effect of the new lawsuit, though, is more insidious. The District must once again shell out a few cubic meters of hundred dollar bills to pay reinforced battalions of lawyers to defend itself against the suit. This is money that won't be spent to fix the schools, repair the infrastructure, put more police on the streets, improve emergency services, and put up some decent directional signs so tourists (and locals) can actually navigate around the city.
Mr Heller is within his rights to file all the suits he wants. But no matter what the outcome of his suit, the only real winners will be the lawyers. Think about that the next time you complain about all the problems that the District has no money to fix.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
4 comments:
Personally I think most people don't quite understand the original reasoning for the right to keep arms etc.
And the gun people are 99.9% wackadoodles in my book.
I agree 100% that legal guns won't help against the illegals, other than the in the hands of many hundreds of cops.
Your point on the other uses DC has for this money is spot-on. In particular, my favorite gripe about DC is the lack of signs. #1 tourist locale in the US and not one friggin' helpful sign to deal with the one-way street nightmare of DC. But the people with guns certainly don't care about tourists or the revenue they bring in.
Maybe the government should go to the public defenders office to save a little money.
Andrea - I tend to agree with you. But I don't think the gun lovers are all necessarily "wackadoodles,' but they're absolutely fixated on the 2nd Amendment for the wrong reasons.
John - Yes, I did. Sometimes, vulgar though it is, it just seems like the right expression.
Katherine - No wonder I still like you after all these years!
Mike - The government wouldn't hire public defenders unless they were under some sweetheart contract.
Post a Comment