The news came like music to my ears (and to hundreds of thousands of other ears across the country, I dare say). Law abiding citizens in the District of Columbia would be allowed to protect their homes and families.
The vote was not unanimous by any means - the historical decision was arrived at by a 5 to 4 vote to remove the ban prohibiting District residents from obtaining handguns. In a WTOP radio interview today, the NRA lobby spokesman, Chris Cox, spoke about the need for cities such as Chicago and San Francisco to fight to have their Second Ammendment rights re-instated.
Mr. Cox also gave notice to D.C. Mayor Fenty that he would have to honor the Supreme Court's decision, even though it is well known that the Mayor is a fierce opponent of allowing law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their loved ones with the aid of a firearm. Mayor Fenty was later qoted as saying; "More guns will mean more crimes".
Apparently the Mayor's flawed and at this stage, thread-bare reasoning, did not influence the majority of Supreme Court Justices. I would dearly love to be able to ask the Mayor this one question; how has the ban on handguns, which has been in effect in the District of Columbia for the past 32 years, helped to cut down on violent crime involving the use of ILLEGAL firearms? I am sure that I am not the only one who has heard D.C. referred to as; "The murder Capital of the World". Are drive-bys, and drug/gang related homicides ever committed by a law abiding citizen? How could having a firearm in one's home lead to more crime?
I put it to you Mr. Mayor, that the exact opposite would/will happen. All of those two-bit gun wielding punks on your streets who think they are big and bad because they have a "piece" jammed in their waist bands will think twice before burglarizing the home of a law abiding citizen who just might be pointing the noisey end of a 45 pistol at them. It is a well known fact that D.C. and Maryland criminals are very reluctant to break into a Virginia home as they know that Virginians have easy access to weapons.
Of course this latest ruling does not in any way mean that we'll all be walking around downtown with concealed firearms. Far from it, I am sure. Justice Scalia pointed out that restrictions will still be in place. As it should be. Law abiding citizens do not want to see convicted Felons carrying guns nor should those suffering from mental disorders or with a history of violent domestic abuse be allowed to access guns. Similar to what we have in Virginia, it is realistic to expect that guns will be banned from Government buildings and schools.
As the owner of a security firm who protects clients from harm and as someone allowed to carry concealed in Virginia and Maryland, I would hope that those of us who are properly licensed and insured in the District will be able to carry concealed there. I wouldn't even mind if the Mayor acted like a proper politician and found a way to tax us for the privilege.
He can even insist that all future gun holders undergo a mandated safety course. Being a certified security training school, we're ready to get on board with the training program today!
The vote was not unanimous by any means - the historical decision was arrived at by a 5 to 4 vote to remove the ban prohibiting District residents from obtaining handguns. In a WTOP radio interview today, the NRA lobby spokesman, Chris Cox, spoke about the need for cities such as Chicago and San Francisco to fight to have their Second Ammendment rights re-instated.
Mr. Cox also gave notice to D.C. Mayor Fenty that he would have to honor the Supreme Court's decision, even though it is well known that the Mayor is a fierce opponent of allowing law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their loved ones with the aid of a firearm. Mayor Fenty was later qoted as saying; "More guns will mean more crimes".
Apparently the Mayor's flawed and at this stage, thread-bare reasoning, did not influence the majority of Supreme Court Justices. I would dearly love to be able to ask the Mayor this one question; how has the ban on handguns, which has been in effect in the District of Columbia for the past 32 years, helped to cut down on violent crime involving the use of ILLEGAL firearms? I am sure that I am not the only one who has heard D.C. referred to as; "The murder Capital of the World". Are drive-bys, and drug/gang related homicides ever committed by a law abiding citizen? How could having a firearm in one's home lead to more crime?
I put it to you Mr. Mayor, that the exact opposite would/will happen. All of those two-bit gun wielding punks on your streets who think they are big and bad because they have a "piece" jammed in their waist bands will think twice before burglarizing the home of a law abiding citizen who just might be pointing the noisey end of a 45 pistol at them. It is a well known fact that D.C. and Maryland criminals are very reluctant to break into a Virginia home as they know that Virginians have easy access to weapons.
Of course this latest ruling does not in any way mean that we'll all be walking around downtown with concealed firearms. Far from it, I am sure. Justice Scalia pointed out that restrictions will still be in place. As it should be. Law abiding citizens do not want to see convicted Felons carrying guns nor should those suffering from mental disorders or with a history of violent domestic abuse be allowed to access guns. Similar to what we have in Virginia, it is realistic to expect that guns will be banned from Government buildings and schools.
As the owner of a security firm who protects clients from harm and as someone allowed to carry concealed in Virginia and Maryland, I would hope that those of us who are properly licensed and insured in the District will be able to carry concealed there. I wouldn't even mind if the Mayor acted like a proper politician and found a way to tax us for the privilege.
He can even insist that all future gun holders undergo a mandated safety course. Being a certified security training school, we're ready to get on board with the training program today!
