National capital, armed and dangerous

At least 5 judges can understand the operative clause in a sentence.
..the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Then, 4 judges need to go back to school.

What a bunch of low IQ hysterical twaddle! These worn out Brady Bunch talking points have been trotted out by every gun bigot and socialist hate group in the battle for gun rights every where in the US the issue has come up. The fact that everything he says has NEVER come true in any State or City where rights are respected, a fact admitted by Police Chiefs after the fact means nothing to the fear mongers. Of this I speak as a military vet and 30 year cop.

The author is a man that hates and fears his fellow citizens and wants to control them out of his own fears and insecurity. Or like most of this kind is mentally driven to control other so he can feel empowered. Freud said that fear of weapons is childish regression. This "column" reeks of it.

If you bother to read the decisions by the High Court you would see that ALL NINE justices found the right of the 2nd Amendment is an individual one. But for reason that can't be explained 4 said that local jurisdictions like DC and opt out of the Constitution at will(?) WE DON'T THINK SO.

Tell me why people in DC are any different than those in any other place in the US? Gun ownership is pretty high in the West, for example. Are there shootouts in the street? This is just silly alarmism.

If, upon the adoption of the new law allowing citizens to carry guns, it ends with some of the guns being used on the MSM, then so be it.

You defend your family and your home with your pen, I will keep a sword handy thank you very much.

So you think terrorists follow gun laws? What gun law is going to stop a terrorist planning an assasination? Do you think we are stupid?

I well recall the hysterical, over the top fear-mongering and expressions of effeminate horror from men who were TERRIFIED of Florida's "letting" people carry concealed weapons in 1987. Of course, since then 39 other states have done the same, with none of the mayhem the pantywaists predicted. It will be the same with DC. allowing honest citizens to be armed. Some people never learn.

People need the right to be armed in D.C. to defend themselves from the dangerous thugs who roam the streets of that town. Most of those thugs probably the off spring of Federal employees that reside in that armpit of a burg.

It will be interesting to, in the future, mull over the carnage wrought by armed citizens defending themselves. I guess dead criminals are a far more worrisome thought than dead victims.

It's the CRIMINALS!

Just check out the availability of firearms, firearm-permit laws and crimes in Colorado, Texas, Florida and a host of other firearm-friendly states, vs. the lawlessness and mayhem in DC..

I think that your article was full of oft-repeated "Brady-Bunch" misinformation and monotonous illogical mantra.. You state "the Second Amendment clearly gives us all the constitutional right to have the capability of shooting one another"...OH PLEASE!....Read the Second Amendment again!

And..."law officers charged with safeguarding the citizenry raised the specter of a downtown firefight.." Oh yeah..Sure..Just like all the "blood running in the streets" of the majority of cities and states who allow the legal possession of firearms to their law-abiding citizens. Maybe you just need more intelligent law enforcement in DC?

Maybe DC needs new laws preventing murder and assault?? Or....Maybe they should just pass laws to make criminals obey the law??..Do you realize that only law-abiding gun owners will obey the laws, and that criminals won't give a rat's ass???

"National Capital, Armed and Dangerous"....Hah!..It was dangerous even before the Heller decision for those victims of criminals.. It is way past time to have self-defense available to those oft-victimized by the illegally-armed armed social misfits that infest DC....

I hope that your article was written tongue-in-cheek and that you are really not that clueless when it comes to gun ownership, self defense and crime statistics...If so, I apologize for my rant..

"What a shameful piece of business. It is one thing to permit the ownership of handguns and regular rifles for one's protection but quite another to allow the public ownership and display of weapons that have only one purpose -- the elimination of as many people as possible"

As often the case the writer puts their true feelings in the last sentence. Dan wants to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban! Well he should do a little research and learn that according to the FBI the all rifles contribute to less than three percent of gun crimes and guns affected by the ban probably contributed to about one percent (the FBI did not break down the stats far enough to be definite). Dan wants to short-circuit the constitution because of his fearfulness instead of asking his fellow Americans if they want to change the Constitution in the manner proscribed by law.

He should consider that allowing lawful citizens to protect themselves with arms may reduce the awful crime wave that is DC. It certainly has in every state where concealed carry has been allowed. At least give the good guys and gals a chance. The bottom line is that DC abused their authority by subjecting the citizens to thirty years of outlawed self protection and shoddy, shoddy law enforcement (DC argued in a civil suit that they had no responsibility to protect a person after being called by two women who were being attacked. The cops drove by and then left). Finally, after three decades of this abuse, DC may lose the authority over gun control. Good. They can go by the same federal laws used in most other places.

Dan, the next step for lowering crime in DC is to do what most of the states have done, allow law abiding citizens to carry concealed. OH MY, that must really scare Dan. People with the ability to protect themselves. OH NO! Dan can't stand for THAT! Dan's alarmist screed is the ode of a coward, not the song of a free man.

E. Zach Lee-Wright

I love these hand-wringing, panty-wetting, hysterical pieces about how dangerous DC will be when people are allowed to defend themselves.

They're so much like the prognostications of the doom-sayers back when Florida enacted it's "shall issue" concealed carry law. Back then, the gun-grabbers were swearing the streets would run "red with blood", that every traffic accident would become an "OK Corral" shootout, that Florida would become the "Gunshine State".

Guess what?

Homicides dropped 20%.

Gun-related homicides dropped 22%.

Washington DC is a perennial candidate for "murder capital of the USA".

It takes quite an imagination to believe that the city with the strictest anti-gun laws just coincidentally has the worst homicide record... or to believe that letting citizens SHOOT BACK at criminals will make things worse.

I'm eager for all the anti-gun folks to go on record predicting doom - so we can call a roll-call of, "You're just as stupid now as you were then" when they're all proven wrong... again.

Thomasson, grow a pair. That's the problem with America, too many wimpy men afraid of their own shadow and inanimate objects. What happens to "men" like you (and your family) when the SHTF? You just bend over and take it. You wouldn't be able to survive without your precious government to hand you your existance. You too conditioned to even notice the chains around your neck..."Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!”

First of all, I'd like to compliment you, Mr. Dan K. Thomasson of SHNS; you have managed to include in your story just about every horror ever imagined about guns and gun ownership that has EVER been uttered, not to mention out and out lies every other sentence, all delivered in a hysterical, over-dramatic style reminiscent of 1930's lurid novels and movies. I'll bet Reefer Madness is one of your favorite movies, and that you took your literary style from that movie's screen writer. But enough of praise. Some things to consider: gun owners are NOT terrorists; the Supreme Court did NOT give license for anyone to carry loaded weapons of any sort on Washington DC streets; small arms, even fully automatic ones, are NOT WMD's; your characterization of a "back bench Mississippian" owning an AK 47 or Mac 10 is PURE BIGOTRY (and what "bill" are you talking about?); Mac 10's are NOT handguns; the DC police chief Lanier is towing the party line as she wishes to keep her job and serves at her mayor's pleasure; the House Oversight Committee is owned by Rep. Waxman and his gun-hating ilk, and it's pronouncements are neither fair nor truthful; DC police are MUNICIPAL, and DO NOT provide principal security for Congress, the judiciary, the executive branch, or visiting dignitaries; Congress DOES NOT make laws for DC (Federal vs local, remember?); the semi-automatic weapons available to the public are NOT battlefield weapons, they are not capable of shooting 600 plus troublesome gun owners per minute; the Constitution does not confer the right to kill, but it does the right of self defense; and finally, Mr. Thomasson: no gun owner that I know would have the poor taste or unspeakably bad manners to flaunt any weapon he or she owns in such a wanton display as you described. Your fantasies about gun fights in the streets are based upon Hollywood's ideas about the Old West. There is now, and has always been proper etiquette, with all weapons, through the ages; only criminals and churls acted improperly, just as we see today. A weapon, any weapon, must be loved as well as respected by the holder. You should take some time to get to know gun owners, to try to understand what we feel about our weapons. But of course, that will not happen, because you, Sir, are a bigot, and to you we are just another form of nigger, isn't that right? It is shameful that so many Democrat politicians are - just - like - you.

I think that I have finally come to understand why so many Democrats clamor for criminals' rights: Criminals all come from large, extended families that are potential voters. Do you realize that the National Socialist Democrats have found a true gold mine for their future politics? After all, wouldn't you vote for a politician that proved beyond a doubt that your poor little baby criminal relative was driven to commit his/her crime by the devilish actions of the dastardly victim? They had it coming! Case dismissed! Pure genius!

Mr. Thomasson, please note that SCOTUS has consistently ruled the police are not responsible for the safety of the individual citizen. So, who ya gonna call, Ghostbusters?

"Resistance to sudden violence for the preservation not only of my person, my limbs and life, but of my property is an indisputable right of nature which I have never surrendered to the public by the compact of society, and which perhaps I could not surrender if I would." - John Adams

"permit the carrying of semi automatic rifles and handguns on the streets of the nation's capitol."

Besides being INCREDIBLY biased, the author is using LIES to scare people. There is no provision for open or concealed carry outside of the home, in this legislation!

DC is doing everything in its power to prevent DC residents from actually using their 2nd Amendment rights.
Examples: SCOTUS ordered that Heller be allowed to register his pistol, but DC has promised to confiscate his 1911 pistol (for some reason DC thinks this nearly hundred-year old handgun, used by millions is a "machine gun"). Also, after being ordered to end its legislation for required disassembly or locks on any and all guns, DC simply added that residents can now unlock their firearms ONLY when under imminent threat of bodily harm.

An armed society is a polite society.

You don't get out much, do you? DC has been "Armed And Dangerous" for over 30 years, now. The problem was that it's only the criminals who were armed, and they could prey on anyone with impunity. Now the people of DC can fight back, and you decry this?

Where did you come up with the idea that people can now carry AK47's and the like on the streets? (I wish!) The Heller decision declared the 2A an individual right, but left plenty of room for *ahem* "reasonable restrictions". (So much for "shall not be infringed.") One can only own a revolver. Semiauto pistols are considered "machine guns" (go figure!) and are forbidden. One can only use his gun in the home for defense, but is not allowed to carry in public, concealed or otherwise. Holmes Norton and her homies are staying as close to an outright ban as they can.

I'd like to see the 2A expressed in it's pure form in DC. The criminals would be the ones living in fear, and our elected officials would be reminded that they are there at our sufferance.

Hi, SamB. Yes, there IS a difference between the people in the West, and those in Washington, DC. (the District of Criminals) The people in DC are 97% black. Coincidence? I think not.

Really, full-auto machine guns are going to be legal on the streets of DC? You mean previously enacted Federal Regulations on machine guns, that affect the entire country, are going to somehow be exempt in Washington DC? And normal capacity pistols, legal in almost every city in the country (with lower crime rates I might add), will make Americans in DC some kind of violent mass murderers? O my! Save DC from having to live like the rest of this country. Hurry! Please!

Thommason is so busy urinating on himself that he goes overboard in showing his ignorance - or else he is a bold faced liar. Apparently he would prefer the status quo which has resulted in Washington DC seeing more killings than Baghad. Of course the average citizen is unarmed and helpless, the police are ineffective and the criminals have more guns than the National Guard. That's fine with Thomasson. His ignorance or untruthfulness shows when he mentions AK-47s and MAC-10s as being available to anyone - as automatic weapons, they are not. By the way - a MAC -10 isn't a handgun - again, his stupidity shows.
I have the answer though. If the criminals target the liberal gun-banners and exterminate them, then the rest of us can live in peace.

Well, seeing as the D.C. and the press are the source of most of the lies and hypocracy inundating the nation, perhaps we should also cancel the application of the First Amendment there. That would certainly make me "feel" much safer...

Mr. Thomasson, you are an ass.

Mr. Thomasson, you, sir, are a real constitutional scholar. Now go back to high school and retake your American history class. BTW, statistics in DC show that violence flourishes in the presence of gun control. I'm not wasting any more time with you, you communist idiot.

We'll be able to have a pool of blood once people can carry AK-47s and 50BMGS! I mean there will be killings by the minute. Screw watching TV in LA where there are daily car chases, I want to see people carrying a 50lbs 6' 50BMG rifle around DC and shooting people! That will be fun! I can't wait! Because you know, cities like Manchester, NH with almost no gun laws are MUCH rougher and have more murders! There isn't a second that goes by without someone either being threatened with or shot with a gun! The police don't even care any more. They just figure in the end the population will be dead from guns and they won't have to bother.

Gun Control is not about crime control; it's about population control. Hitler, every communist, mass murdered believed in it!

Jacob Anderson
http://CriminalsForGunControl.com/