Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Comment by George L. Lyon, Jr., Member, Lukas Nace Gutierrez & Sachs
The Heller Decision Will Decrease Victimization - 18 hours ago
Many persons are decrying the Heller decision with the shop worn line that "more guns will mean more innocent deaths." Nothing could be farther from the truth. What the Heller decision will do to a very small part is help equalize the disparity of power between the criminal and the potential victim. The disparity in so-called gun free zones like the District of Columbia overwhelmingly favors the violent criminal. The Virginia Tech massacre is a telling example. One person willing to break the law killed more than 30 others because his illegal use of a gun allowed it. He selects his victims. He selected the time of the assault. He selected the means of the assault. He had no problem using a gun even though it violated school regulations because if he was disposed to commit a violent assault he certainly was willing to ignore a rule against possessing a gun. Recognizing the right to own a functional firearm in the home moves the power just a little bit toward the victim and away from the criminal. At least in my home now I am entitled to possess a functional tool with which I may defend myself and my family. Heller is even more important for those who are particularly vulnerable. Small women, seniors and persons with certain physical disabilities are particularly vulnerable to violent attacks. A functional firearm is an equalizer in those circumstances. My fellow plaintiff once defended his life against a group of attackers with a gun. He is convinced he would be dead now had he not done so.
Much of the criticism I have heard of Heller in the last 24 hours is nonsense. DC Del. Holmes-Norton suggests that citizens will be at a disadvantage compared to criminals because criminals will know how to use guns but the citizens will not. It is doubtful, however, that most criminals regularly practice with their guns at the range. By contrast, I have more than 100 hours of formal firearms training. Nothing would stop DC from requiring a reasonable number of hours of training in order to possess a handgun. Right now, DC requires no firearms knowledge to possess either a shotgun or rifle, both of which are far more lethal than most handguns. I was appalled that not one question of the test DC administers to shotgun and rifle registrants tests the four basic rules of gun safety: 1. Treat every gun as if it is loaded. 2. Do not point a gun at anything you would not want to destroy. 3. Do not put your finger in the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot. 4. Know your target and what is in line with your target. Rather DC requires shotgun and rifle registrants to know the details of DC's complicated firearms laws. If the city was really concerned with gun safety, it would teach it and require knowledge of gun safety as part of its registration requirements. Virtually every state that allows citizens to carry concealed handguns, such as Virginia, requires a gun safety and handling course. That is why accidental and unlawful shootings are virtually unheard of by concealed hand gun permittees. Moreover, those states which permit concealed carry to all qualified individuals experience a decrease in violent crime after such laws go into effect. Thus, DC brand gun control is not just unconstitutional, its poor public policy as well.
The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.
~ Senator Barack H. Obama