Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Washington DC and Guns

Washington D.C. enjoys a terrible reputation when it comes to violent crime, particularly in regards to its homicide rate. In recent years, however, the District has seen a steady and promising decrease in its homicide rate. In 2005 (most current year for which complete statistics are available) Washington D.C. was not in the top ten cities for homicide rates per capita.

This week has seen a major blow to safety and sanity struck by the District's Federal Appeals Court in its decision to overturn D.C.'s long standing ban on hand guns. In its ruling the court went against nearly 70 years of Supreme Court precedent in determining that the Second Amendment can be applied to individuals as opposed to its intent to protect 'well regulated militias.'

Gun enthusiasts will argue that if guns are illegal than only criminals have guns, whereas law-abiding citizens will now be able to defend themselves. It boggles the reasonable mind to see how making guns, especially hand guns, easier to obtain and thereby increasing the number of weapons on the street could possibly stand to make anyone safer. Additionally studies have shown that guns kept in the home only serve to increase the likelihood that members of said home will be shot, and that guns are almost never used to deter home invasion scenarios.

Regulating guns, particularly hand guns, makes sense. The fewer guns available and the more difficult those guns are to obtain the less often guns will be used in the commission of criminal acts or, for that matter, in the accidental shootings that also plague our nation. Only criminals run stop signs; should we therefore eliminate stop signs? As D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty told NPR's Steve Inskeep "if you had less stop signs then there'd be more accidents you don't stop regulating something just because you haven't completely eliminated the problem." Incidentally Mr. Inskeep could have been more pro gun and pro violence in the conduction of that interview but he would have had to start calling Mr. Fenty names to accomplish that feat (see below for a letter to NPR in regard).

Hopefully on further appeal this unfortunate and out of step ruling of the Appeals Court will be overturned and hand guns will not proliferate in the District. Sadly sanity and common sense when it comes to gun control have a much harder road to hoe. Most Americans believe falsely that the Second Amendment gives individuals the right to own and keep guns in their homes. They believe this because the pro gun lobby has so artfully misconstrued the Second Amendment, as former Chief Justice Warren Burger said, "[The Second Amendment] has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, repeat the word 'fraud,' on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."






Letter to NPR:

to: Morning Edition

subject: Mayor Fenty Interview and Coverage of DC Gun Ban Case

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing in regards to this mornings interview of Washington DC Mayor Adrian Fenty and the coverage afforded to the DC gun ban case.

While I am nearly always impressed with your coverage of a wide range of stories and the presentation of both multiple sides to a story as well as multiple questions that many stories raise, your coverage of the DC gun ban case fell woefully short in both cases.

All of Mr. Inskeep's questions were posed from a pro-gun standpoint and he perseverated in forcing Mr. Fenty to defend his city's long standing and publicly popular ban on hand guns. A more balanced and neutral tone would have been more appropriate.

More importantly the interview and coverage missed one of the major tenets of this story. DC's ban on guns is not new, it has existed with degrees of success since 1976 and was just struck down by an Appeals Court ruling that flies in the face of nearly 70 years of precedent. Dating to the 1939 Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Miller which declared 'that the Second Amendment was adopted "with obvious purpose" of protecting the ability of states to organize militias and "must be interpreted and applied with that end in view."'(wording borrowed from Washington Post Editorial Dangerous Ruling).

This story is very arguably about this dangerous ruling that is drastically out of step with all other American courts. To fail to cover that aspect of the story was inexcusable. To adopt a tone for the interview that suggested there is nothing wrong with keeping a gun in your house was just distasteful.

Sincerely
Henry Coppola

No comments:

Post a Comment