By Glen Wunderlich Outdoor Columnist Member Professional Outdoor Media Association
In a recent court decision, Judge Ricardo M. Urbina gave his blessing to Washington D.C.’s onerous and restrictive gun control laws designed to make it hard on the working family man to defend himself. He and the District’s leaders must be proud to have placed their anti-gun activism on display in spite of the 2008 landmark Supreme Court case of Heller. But after all, the door was left wide open for a challenge when “reasonable” gun ownership regulations might be acknowledged as acceptable.
What the District then did under the banner of reasonableness was an obvious attempt to push back against the law-abiding. First, it made hoop jumping an art form by requiring a 5-hour class and 20-question test plus personal visits to the police department for fingerprints and background checks. In addition, an applicant would be required to pay in excess of $550 for the paperwork fees. (In Michigan, we have similar tests and much lesser costs but only to obtain permits to carry pistols concealed. These costs and classes in Washington are simply to own a handgun!)
If all of the above doesn’t discourage a D.C. resident from handgun ownership, more “reasonable” restrictions might do the trick. To begin, all semiautomatic handguns are forbidden. That should eliminate about half of the troublemakers. If it holds more than 10 rounds, forget it. But if a determined citizen chooses the approved, politically-correct handgun for self-defense, for example, he must store it unloaded and disabled. (Actually this law was subsequently changed to only require guns to be locked when minors may gain access to them. Astonishingly, D.C.’s murder rate dropped 25 percent after the law was found unconstitutional in the Heller case.)
This just in: A recent survey shows that crooks prefer the reasonable regulations 100 percent. We sure don’t want to be accused of discriminating against one who may be down on his luck, now do we? If anyone cannot understand why Americans have propelled gun manufacturers profits into the stratosphere over the past year or so, slow down digest D.C.’s tactics once more.
No new arguments in defense of the District’s position on “public safety concerns” were offered in court; in fact, the court chose to ignore relevant facts that always point to less crime when firearms restrictions and red tape are relaxed. All that was needed was one port-leaning puppet appointed by Bill Clinton.
No doubt an appeal will follow but the chances of overturning the sham grow more difficult each day, as the Obama administration appoints more left-minded Appellate judges that reflect his own left leanings.
I am not surprised that a recent Harris poll indicates that some 18.4 million Americans “currently participate” in handgun shooting – an increase from 16.8 million only last September. The same poll showed that 40 percent of recent firearms purchasers were buying guns for home protection, followed closely by personal protection and target shooting.
Americans understand that more self defense is a deterrent to crime and they are demonstrating it no mater how hard government attempts to protects us from ourselves.
