Has DC's Handgun Ban Prevented Bloodshed?

The Supreme Court Will Examine Ban's Constitutionality, Others Question Its Effectiveness

(AP)  On Sept. 24, 1976, one of the toughest gun laws in the nation took effect in the District of Columbia, essentially outlawing the private ownership of new handguns in a city struggling with violence.

Over the next few weeks, a man with a .32-caliber pistol held up workers at a downtown federal office at midday, a cab driver was shot in the head, and a senator was mugged by three youths, one carrying a revolver, near the U.S. Capitol.

Since the ban was passed, more than 8,400 people have been murdered in the district, many killed by handguns. Nearly 80 percent of the 181 murders in 2007 were committed with guns.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in a challenge to the city's handgun ban. The case is likely to produce the most important firearms ruling in generations and could undermine other gun control laws nationwide if the court takes an expansive view of the right to bear arms.

The central question is whether the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to bear arms, or instead protects the collective right of states to maintain militias. The court probably won't base its ruling on the effectiveness of Washington's law.

Outside the court, however, a long-debated question is whether a strict gun law like Washington's has any effect on violent crime.

City leaders say the law has kept many guns off the street and warn that violence could increase without it. Firearms still flow in from states like Maryland and Virginia, but District of Columbia officials say the ban reduces the number of legally owned firearms that are stolen or used in domestic killings and suicides.

"Whatever right the Second Amendment guarantees, it does not require the district to stand by while its citizens die," the city wrote in its petition to the Supreme Court last year.

To gun rights advocates, the numbers prove a different point: Violence continues unchecked despite the ban. And while criminals seem to be able to get guns with ease, law-abiding people are being denied the means to protect themselves, they say.

"I should be able to live in the district and protect myself," said Shelly Parker, who said she was harassed and threatened in her former Capitol Hill home by a drug dealer who once tried to break down her door. Parker was a plaintiff in the original case against the city.

Those who live daily with gun violence on Washington's streets, many of them just teens, paint a stark picture of how easy it is to get a firearm. A gun can be bought with a few well-placed calls and a couple hundred dollars.

"Some people look at a gun as part of their outfit," said Maurice Benton, a 19-year-old who says he has never had a gun but was shot in the abdomen by members of a gang while leaving a party in 2006. "They can't go anywhere without it."

The city's gun ban emerged from exasperation. Still reeling from the riots of 1968, the city saw violent crime rise and residents flee to the suburbs. In 1974, two years before the ban took effect, more than half of all homicides were committed with handguns.

There were an estimated 22,000 registered gun owners in the city in 1976, but a Georgetown University poll found three out of four city residents supported the bill. The law cleared the D.C. Council in a 12-1 vote and went on to survive both a court challenge by the National Rifle Association and efforts in Congress to scuttle it.

"Handgun crimes were just getting out of sight," said Sterling Tucker, D.C. Council chairman when the ban was enacted. "We had to isolate and contain the problem. We thought a handgun law would do that."

The law bars private ownership of handguns, with exceptions for law enforcement officers and those who had registered handguns before the ban took effect. Shotguns and rifles are legal, but must be disassembled or stored with trigger locks.

Homicides in the district did ebb over the next few years, largely following a national trend. In 1977, the U.S. Conference of Mayors reported robberies, assaults and homicides using handguns had fallen sharply in D.C. and concluded the ban was working. However, the results were challenged even by the city's police department, which said police tactics had contributed to the drop.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, murders spiked as Washington, like many other cities, was hit by the crack epidemic. By 1991, the number of homicides reached 479, or 81 deaths per 100,000 people, earning the city status as the nation's murder capital.

Yet that year, a study released by University of Maryland criminologists in the New England Journal of Medicine suggested the gun ban had saved lives in the decade before. They argued the ban had prevented 47 deaths per year in D.C., both suicides and murders. Surrounding areas in Maryland and Virginia had not seen a corresponding drop in gun crime.

The study analyzed data only through 1987, and did not incorporate the higher murder rate during the crack surge, an epidemic critics said revealed the law's weakness. Other criminologists said the study should have compared the district to Baltimore, a city with similar crime problems where violence also declined during the same period. The authors went back and compared the district to other cities, including Baltimore, saying their conclusions still held up.

In the late 1990s, the annual homicide numbers began to fall as the crack scourge ebbed. In the past decade, many of the city's neighborhoods also have undergone a revitalization, attracting more affluent residents. Last year, there were 181 murders.

But the city's location remains a problem for the law. Washington is surrounded by Virginia and Maryland, where guns remain legal, and many firearms can be traced to shops just across the line. The number of guns seized by police has surged in recent years, reaching 2,924 in 2007, nearly 1,000 more than in 2003. Most of the guns were used in crimes.

Sterling Tucker said city officials realized the law had its limits, that guns would never vanish from the streets. And they never imagined it would do away with homicides and violent crime altogether. He believes it has at least provided some check on violence, taken away a tool for some criminals.

"We knew there were problems we couldn't wipe out," he said. "But we had a little more control over it."

[libsrweak]

suprise suprise!!

the very first thing DC needs to do is LOCK UP all those bleeding heart liberals who wrote the bill to ban the handgun THEN THEY CAN START FROM THERE..if we are to listen to these morons..we would be solving poverty with concerts..solving crime by legalizing crime..THESE FU CKERS ARE SO FAST ON BANNING THINGS THINKING THAT ITS EASIER THAT WAY..NO WORK NO SACRIFICE NO GUILT..

[libsrweak]

by the way..quick question for these DC officials..so what are you goings doing with the criminals???????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[beehive21-2009]

DC is like Mars,no vote, Marion Barry (crack heads)was probably on the council when this joke was enacted. DC is not part of the USA,and should be burnt.

[melv1n-2009]

There will be a day soon were there are no more law abiding citizens, because our laws are increasingly making all of us criminals...

[jettskiman]

"The number of guns seized by police has surged in recent years, reaching 2,924 in 2007, nearly 1,000 more than in 2003. MOST OF THE GUNS WERE USED IN CRIMES." Those two sentences are pretty much all you have to read in this story to get the picture. All of the thugs love this law. They know the upstanding citizens wont brake the law and have a gun so it gives them free rain to rob, burglarize and rape anybody they want.

[trueprogress]

As a college professor, I have an overview which may bring some insight into this discussion and perhaps some wisdom. When me and my studnets talk about guns, we realize that most people feel that they have a right to protect themselves, yet it is not the so called criminals that we must address or be afraid of. It is ourselves and society. If we put more money into day care setting, school lunch programs, after school poetry and life skills classes, there simply would be no crime, as there would be no time for crime ! We need to look at our own priorities. Are we greedy and not giving ? Do we need to buy that plasma TV or should we join a community discussion group to stand with the community not be fighting against it ?

When a young man steals from a store , he is usually just calling out for help. We need to listen.

[mcman98]

Gun bans do not create a safer society. They rather produce a ready pool of victims. Criminals never obey these laws and enjoy preying upon an unarmed populace. In addition, the cry about gun accidents is overstated. Gun accidents are at an all time low. Education is the key here. Gun safety should be taught to all children in school, not hysteria or fear.

[krisd999-2009]

Murders fell because all the gangsters killed off each other. Killing the right people is a good thing and statistics never take that into account. Once the ban is repealed more thugs will get killed by regular folks. It doesn''t mean it''s bad. Do you feel lucky, punk? There are bad people and they need killing. Otherwise they will take over society and thet will love it that you don''t have a gun. Longer term, crime will go down.

[haoli25]

If someone wants to rob me, it''s okay with me. My gun holds 17 "Social Solutions" for anyone that wants to try.

[armandbeni]

Guns don''t kill people, impotent lawmakers do. Unlicenced guns are already illegal, felons with guns is already illegal, underage gun ownership is already illegal. Enforce these laws and the crime rate will go down. duhhhh

[gunownerdan]

"To disarm the people is the most effective way to enslave them."
- George Mason

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson quoting criminologist Cesare Beccaria from "On Crimes and Punishment", 1764

"Tyrants from Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control. Our Founders, having just expelled the British army, knew that the right to bear arms serves as the guardian of every other right. This is the principle so often ignored by both sides in the gun control debate. Only armed citizens can resist tyrannical government."
- Congressman Ron Paul, June 26, 2006

Self Defense
A-HUMAN-RIGHT.com

[gunownerdan]

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the
security of a free State, the right of the PEOPLE to
keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

"The militia of the United States consists of all able bodied males at least 17 years of age.."
- U.S. Code Title 10, Section 311

"Today we need a nation of minute men; citizens who are not only prepared to take up arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as a basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.
The cause of liberty, the cause of American, cannot succeed with any lesser effort."
- President John F. Kennedy, January 29, 1961

[nikkicatt1]

I have one question for the people that think the ban is good: Have you, or any of your family, been involved in a home invasion or any other crime involving a gun? I have. My 9mm saved my life. However, I believe that all gun owners need to be licensed and trained. With any sort of power comes great responsibility. My "right" to bear arms means that I can protect my home and family.

[gunownerdan]

Free people can own guns, slaves can not.

To enslave a nation disarm the citizens.

When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

Criminals prefer unarmed victims.

The second amendment is not about deer hunting, it''s about preventing thugs from hunting YOU.

[keithle1]

You can own a gun but you have to register it, the police need to know you have it, you have to be properly trained, etc. If the police pull you over & they see a gun on the back seat of your car & it''s not registered then you''re going to jail. What''s wrong with that?

Keeping it in your home for you/your family''s protection is one thing. Walking around with it is something else. I''m not keen on people who aren''t law enforcement officers doing that.

We have 9 guns for every 10 people in the USA. What can we do about that? Not much. Is there another country that has as many guns as we do?

Recipe for disaster: 59% of black boys graduated from high school in Wash DC last year. For Hispanic boys, it was around 40%.

The more educated the population, the less crime.

[gunownerdan]

Some of the earliest gun control laws in America were used by the South to disarm freed slaves who had guns to feed themselves and to protect themselves from LYNCH MOBS and the KKK.
As a matter of fact, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Lenin, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Idi Amin, Mugabe, (just to name a few)
have all banned civilians from owning weapons - making their civilians defenseless before butchering millions of them during the 20th century just because of their race, religion, or political affiliation.
Even the famous "SHOT HEARD AROUND THE WORLD" at Lexington and Concord which began the American Revolution was fired in order to prevent a gun ban from being enforced by the British soldiers.
The "Redcoats" had direct orders from the King of England to confiscate all guns and gun powder from the Americans!
Responsible civilian gun ownership makes liberty possible.
Gun bans are hateful and gun bans kill!

[rafterman1]

I''m not sure what keeping or getting rid of the ban will do. The ban only applied to new guns. It never took into account all the guns already existing in criminal''s hands. right? Since there are 300-500 million firearms in this country, the genie is already out of its bottle. People just protecting themselves already had their weapons. Would-be criminals could still get a legal firearm outside the city and existing criminals don''t usually go the legal route to get a gun anyway, so a ban in the city doesn''t matter.

So, it seems logical to me that the only ones truly affected by this law are the people (like first-time buyers) who want to buy a gun for legitimate reasons.

[katia327]

Some of you might be interested in the bigger picture on this. Your right to privacy is also being intruded on. At least in DC. Check this out.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58825

Abolishing guns, searching and seizing in peoples private homes, is against ALL of our rights! Our right to privacy, our right to bear arms, and defend ourselves against those criminals, who are able to STILL get guns and use them in DC, leaving the innocent defenseless against them.

It amazes me. Criminals get away with things and good, law abiding, innocent people become the victims and targets. With NO ability to have the choice to fight back.

Let''s hope the people of DC get their rights back.

[gunownerdan]

It''s easy to blame guns after a tragic shooting.
People will say "let''s ban all handguns or "assault weapons".
But how are you going to make guns go away if you ban them?
There are enough guns in America to arm every single adult and then some.
Do we send SWAT teams bursting into every home and business in America looking for guns?
Do we hire Blackwater soldiers or make the Army bust down every door in America to take away our guns?
Many millions of Americans will never give up our constitutional rights and our best means of self defense.
Where are we going to lock up many millions of uncooperative citizens?
Our jails are already full!
Do we send anyone who does not cooperate to giant concentration camps?
If so, we are going to need a lot of concentration camps!
I don''t know why people choose to harm themselves and others but blaming guns and making everyone defenseless will never solve a single thing.
KILLERS PREFER UNARMED VICTIMS

[gunownerdan]

"One man with a gun can control 100 without one. Make mass searches and hold executions for found arms."
- Lenin

"Ideas are more dangerous than guns. We wouldn%u2019t let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?"
- Joseph Stalin

"Every Communist must grasp the truth, Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Our Principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party."
- Mao Zedong

"On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results."
- Benito Mussolini

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing."
- Adolf Hitler

"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don''t need
guns, as their having guns doesn''t serve the State."
- Heinrich Himmler, Hitler''s SS leader

[gunownerdan]

Well over 60 million defenseless civilians were murdered by their own governments during the 20th century alone.

Germany and Occupied Europe - 15-20 million

"Licences to obtain or carry firearms shall be issued only to persons whose reliability is not in doubt, and only after prooving a need for them."
German Law, 1928

"Jews are prohibited from acquiring, possessing, and carrying firearms and ammunition, as well as truncheons or stabbing weapons.
Those now possessing weapons and ammunition are at once to turn them over to the local police authority.
Firearms and ammunition found in a Jew''s possession will be forfeited to the government without compensation.
Whoever willfully or negligently violates the provisions...will be punished with imprisonment and a fine.
Berlin, 11 November 1938
Minister of the Interior
Frick"
German Law, 1938
http://www.jpfo.org/NaziLawGerman.htm

Soviet Union - 20 million

"All permits for the carrying or keeping of arms...are invalid and must be exchanged for new certificates..."
Soviet Resolution, 1918

"Any violation of laws concerning...firearms are punishable by forced labor."
Soviet Law, 1926

China - 30-45 million

"Whoever, without authority or good cause...is found in possession of guns...shall be punished with imprisonment."
Chinese Law, 1935

"Buying or possessing firearms or ammunition for use in athletic activities or for hunting...[shall be punished with detention]"
Chinese Law, 1957

[Phone Kall]

What a joke.
That lady want a gun for protection and what does she get? A .22/.25/.32 auto? Great knock down power!
That proves right there that people in DC need to pass an intelligence and an I.Q test BEFORE they purchase a weapon! LMAO!

[usmcvn2]

But won''t Jaysus protect me?? LOL

[usmcvn2]

I own (1) S&W .357Mag

(2) 40Cal Glock

(3) 1911A1 45

(4) Lever Action 30-30 Win.Rifle

(5) One plastic Jaysus for my truck dashboard.

I''m ready!!

Tree Huggers stray away!

[usmcvn2]

I believe gun control is how steady your hand holds your gun!!!!!!!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by hhroams at 08:35 AM : Mar 15, 2008


Wrong, wrong, wrong. Gun control control is HITTING
YOUR TARGET!!! ROFL!!

[usmcvn2]

Its always best to get the ultimate but get what you can even if it is a .22.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by hhroams at 08:46 AM : Mar 15, 2008

I know a Woman who has a 22MAG. She is former Army and
knows how to use a pistol. 22mag is okay for protection, would give her time to shot the bad guy a second time!! LOL LOL

Of course, some races have thick skulls! So I perfer a
larger round.

[battleroaron]

the headline should read : is ban on guns in D.C. against your constitutional rights? that is what it should be about; how our rights are being raped by the gov''t once again...

[jmagarotz]

I''''m retired Law Enforcement. You can pry my weapon from my cold, dead fingers. I''''ve personally seen the depravity of our citizens. Therefore, you''''ll never take my weapon without taking my life. Everyone wants to take my weapon from me. All I have to ask is: "Who''''s first"?

Posted by maxify55 at 07:55 AM : Mar 15, 2008

I''m a former LEO and in total agreement. I''ve seen the most disgusting things happen to the victims. Those who haven''t experienced it can''t believe it. Trust me it IS NOT like CSI or Cops. I wish some of the liberal posters could experience just enough of it to make them puke. Then they might have a hint of what an LEO goes through on a daily basis. BTW don''t bother writing about the cop that wants guns banned, that jerk''s the last cop you want enforcing your laws. Hope you had a good tour maxify55 enjoy your retirement, you deserve it.

[faultytowers]

Individuals have no direction for their lives. They randomly go out and killed themselves a person. They were never taught about taking responsibility for their own actions. They could reach out for the Lords love to guide them. As it is they want self! The death penalty finalizes a murderer%u2019s earthly decision! To take a life brings consequences, their come-up-ins. It also gives the killer time to get right before his maker. Thus there is an end to this life but grace to find the Lord before the next. This sets a precedent. See it%u2019s that simple! A murderer%u2019s core being is bent on self! To take a life at random is hideous!

[dowjones20k]

Ironic that all these ghetto''s are just outside the capitol .. and the pols always blather about how they want to help the poor ...

Maybe they should help the law abiding citizens and make it mandatory for all of them to carry weapons?

I beleive if thugs and gangsters knew that innocent folks may very well be packin .. they might think twice about mugging or attacking victims ...

And shame on these pols who have secret service & all kinds of other protection to keep them safe .. they should all have to live right in the middle of all this villence .. maybe then they would "get it" or get it with a cap in their A S S ...

Shameful !!!

[kaiyo4u]

CBS, I believe in our Constitution and what it stands for. While your First Amendment rights are solid at this point, what would happen if the Second Amendment were repealed? Anything you write would be monitored by the "state" before publication. I perused your interactive on "Guns in America" and found it somewhat biased against guns.
There are a lot of fact there, but it is only half reported. You leave out the facts of those who adequately defended themselves against perpetrators who would have left them dead or dying.
Why is that CBS? You''re not the only one in the press doing this either...
Guns don''t kill, people kill.
If pencils cause mispelled words, should we ban them?
If matches cause forest fires, should we ban them?
Just a couple of examples of the tools we use and there effects if used improperly...

[beehive21-2009]

It is your duty as an American to arm yourselves for protection against the have nots, whom will not work preferring to sit around getting high or drunk all day and may soon grow hungry.Soon, they''ll come knocking ,who you goin call ? Marion Barry says it all for DC the crack head was re-elected for showing the world how to smoke crack on TV.

[facts6]

"""When a young man steals from a store , he is usually just calling out for help. We need to listen.
trueprogress"""
Dear True-
how many of these needy young men do you have in your home for gentle, philosophical rehabilitation? Perhaps once exposed to Socrates and Pascal they will snap to and lay down their arms.

Please create a bolg and let us know howz it going.

[kaylag04]

If access to firearms is the cause of mass shootings and violent crime, why has there never been a mass-murder at a gun show?

[drivelphobe]

maxify55

I support your comment. I am an average retired businessman with a family. I own guns for protection. I practice at shooting ranges and enjoy target practice using cans and paper targets. I admit that I lack situational training, but I would recognize a serious threat and I''m aware of safety measures one should use around firearms.

I hope I never need to use one of my guns for self defense, but I am prepared to act swiftly and lethally if need be. I keep a gun with me at all times, particularly when traveling. I will not be a victim without a fight.

I live in the Los Angeles area and it teems with human vermin, armed and nuts, looking to prey on anyone at any time. No police could come in time to assist even though they would love to.

It would be nice if we could get permits to carry concealed weapons. The malls and other public places present constant threat. One has to continuously be alert to the surroundings.

Thanks for your years of service.

[jlwesley]

I have a lifetime handgun permit issued by the state that I reside in, I reside in this state because they allow the carrying of a handgun, I carry a S&W 40 cal automatic pistol where ever I go, on 2 occassions it prevented what I am sure would have been car hijackings, maybe if we passed a new law in this country, requiring that all law abiding males, over the age of 21, be required to receive training in hand gun use and be required to carry one at all times, something could really be done to stop violent crime.

[kaylag04]

Joyous88 wrote: "No one wants your gun stupid,
we want criminals to not get a hold of guns ,and
you idiots are too stupid to help
because you are afraid"

I notice that folks who, by your definition, aren''t "afraid", tend to use caps-lock, exclamation points and insults quite a bit. Developing confidence in a position, through resarch and experience, tends to develop arguments that don''t need screaming or embellishment to have an effect.

[berniepeders]

If we put more money into day care setting, school lunch programs, after school poetry and life skills classes, there simply would be no crime...Posted by trueprogress at 03:05 AM : Mar 15, 2008

I wish there was a way that I could make my screams heard on this board. I can''t believe that anyone stupid enough to hold a belief like that is also intelligent enough to use a computer to post said belief. Is there any intelligent life left on this planet?
Pax vobiscum

[g0ldmembr]

gun controlis useless,in the united states if in ammendment to the constitution was introduced it would get defeated almost instantly whatwe need to do is is crack down on illegal weapons, people who bring rpg''s high caliber machie guns explosives and other military heavy weaponry, we don''t need to crack down on innocent people who want to defend themseleves and spend countless dollars in doing so we should expand our search to the importing docks instead

[ubrew12]

berniepeders said: "I can''t believe that anyone stupid enough to hold a belief like that..." I think TrueProgress is right, but we''ve spent too much money giving the Iraqi''s the ''freedoms'' we have here at home, so can''t afford his improvements.

berniepeders said: "Is there any intelligent life left on this planet?" I think the kind of ''intelligence'' you''re looking for is found nowadays only in Uranus.

[hungry1968]

YOU LIBS SHOULD READ THE BIBLE INSTEAD OF PENTHOUSE!

Posted by pub17 at 12:06 PM : Mar 15, 2008





Now that''s funny!!!

Don''t look at dirty pictures!!!

Read the book that contains murder, rape, incest, bigotry, and racism as morally acceptable in their religion!!

Buffoon.

[rogerspebble]

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

If you leave a gun sitting on a table, this oject can do you no harm;it''s the mentality behind the object that cause''s the most damage.

[hungry1968]

Do you know how many inmates are killed in prison each year by other inmates? The number of assaults is through the roof, and the number of murders is pretty high. They have NO ACCESS to guns - they use shanks, cutters, sharps, strangulations, etc, etc.

My point is that bad people don''t NEED guns to commit their crimes, and even if the guns are outlawed, they will only find another means to commit the act. All that gun control is going to do is to make it harder for law abiding citizens to get those weapons.

[jackp32]

Note to political hacks: keep your dirty hands off of my guns.

[jackp32]

Note to liberal anti gun weenies: if I see someone assaulting you or a member of your family, I will draw my pistol and come to your aid. I understand that you will not come to my aid since you are not armed because you are an anti gunner who does not believe in the second amendment.

[payasyougo]

According to the 2006 census, DC has a black population of 56.5%. Comparing the DC murder rate to other states w/ demographics taken into account is a subject few want to broach.

Bottom line is, guns are not the core issue of the murder rate in DC.

There is a high probability that freeing up gun ownership in DC will NOT have as dramatic affect on the murder rate as in states with a lower black population (2006 data DC w/ 29.1 murders per 100k residents). 2006 data shows that VA was 20% black (w/ 5.2 murders per 100k) and MD was 30% black (w/ 9.7 murders per 100k).

The murder rate tracks linearly with percentage of black population at higher than a 1.0 gain.

This 2006 data is from the web.
DC pop=581,000, murders=169, %black=56.5
MD pop=5,615,727, murders=546, %black=19.9
VA pop=7,642,884, murders=399, %black=29.5

I''m a gun ownership advocate but in the case of DC, the data shows it probably won''t make a difference.

[redbarron73]

The murder rate tracks linearly with percentage of black population at higher than a 1.0 gain.


posted by payasyougo


Sooooo, maybe we should outlaw blacks instead of guns.

[photogeezer]

The ugly truth about a gun for self protection is that it has to be loaded, handy and very portable or it''s worthless. I can''t leave it at home for some gangbanger kid to break in, steal it and use it in a crime. My town, San Jose, CA has a gang problem in every working class neighborhood, the only places I can afford to own a home. I am breaking the law by having a loaded pistol in my car, or concealed on me downtown. If I have to defend my or my wife''s safety with it, I have little choice but to shoot center of mass to stop the attack and one in the eye to eliminate him as a witness. Then I have to hope no one sees this happen. In California, I could go to jail for successfully defending myself. I don''t even own a gun, but the ugly truth looms, that I may need to defend myself or my home, and, by doing so, could go to jail.

[payasyougo]

According to the 2006 census, DC has a black population of 56.5%. Comparing the DC murder rate to other states w/ demographics taken into account is a subject few want to broach.

Bottom line is, guns are not the core issue of the murder rate in DC.

There is a high probability that freeing up gun ownership in DC will NOT have as dramatic affect on the murder rate as in states with a lower black population (2006 data DC w/ 29.1 murders per 100k residents). 2006 data shows that VA was 20% black (w/ 5.2 murders per 100k) and MD was 30% black (w/ 9.7 murders per 100k).

The murder rate tracks linearly with percentage of black population at higher than a 1.0 gain.

This 2006 data is from the web.
DC pop=581,000, murders=169, %black=56.5
MD pop=5,615,727, murders=546, %black=29.5
VA pop=7,642,884, murders=399, %black=19.9

I''''m a gun ownership advocate but in the case of DC, the data shows it probably won''''t make a difference.

(corrected MD & VA data)

[bhappy2-2]

The thing is, Gun control is not about guns, it is about control. Banning the guns in D.C. did not stop the criminals from getting guns, it only prevented the law-abiding citizens from exercising their constitutional rights, protecting themselves and their families and from enjoying shooting as a sport. From what I have seen of other countries gun bans do not prevent any crime and may actually increase crime because the criminals know their victim is unarmed.
In Canada right now there are groups of Indians (Native Canadians?) who are taking over peoples property and demanding payment to allow the owners to keep their property. If the owners had readily available firearms the actions of the thieving groups would not be nearly as easy.