Comments on: Why a Victory For Gun Rights Was a Defeat for the NRA http://badidea.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/why-a-victory-for-gun-rights-was-a-defeat-for-the-nra/ Science, Skepticism, and Silly. Critics welcome. Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:31:13 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: GM http://badidea.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/why-a-victory-for-gun-rights-was-a-defeat-for-the-nra/#comment-4140 GM Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:44:02 +0000 http://badidea.wordpress.com/?p=433#comment-4140 Very cogent commentary on the relative importance of gun rights . . . Very cogent commentary on the relative importance of gun rights . . .

]]> By: Grendel The Martyr http://badidea.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/why-a-victory-for-gun-rights-was-a-defeat-for-the-nra/#comment-4120 Grendel The Martyr Sun, 29 Jun 2008 22:34:56 +0000 http://badidea.wordpress.com/?p=433#comment-4120 To me it's much ado about nothing. Not that I don't think protecting constitutional rights is important, it's just that this is an area where the average citizen isn't going to give a hoot what the law says. You can believe that those DC citizens who want handguns in their home or business for self-defense absolutely have them and damn the law. It's a low risk crime for the otherwise law-abiding because they're not likely to get caught with an illegal weapon when they don't commit other crimes. For the otherwise law-abiding DC citizen, having the gun ban probably made it *easier* to actually own them - no need to bother with registration, permits, taxes, fees, etc. There's a saying concerning the commission of a crime in defense of one's self, family, home, or business: "I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6." There's a common sense facet to the issue as well. Thirty years ago or so, the DC area was fraught with high rates of violent crime and the area remains a national leader in homicides and gun crimes. City Council's response to the problem of a citizenry beset by armed gangs of drug dealers, armed robbers, and armed home invaders? Disarm the citizens! In the practical sense, that's pure idiocy. To me it’s much ado about nothing. Not that I don’t think protecting constitutional rights is important, it’s just that this is an area where the average citizen isn’t going to give a hoot what the law says. You can believe that those DC citizens who want handguns in their home or business for self-defense absolutely have them and damn the law. It’s a low risk crime for the otherwise law-abiding because they’re not likely to get caught with an illegal weapon when they don’t commit other crimes. For the otherwise law-abiding DC citizen, having the gun ban probably made it *easier* to actually own them – no need to bother with registration, permits, taxes, fees, etc.

There’s a saying concerning the commission of a crime in defense of one’s self, family, home, or business: “I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.”

There’s a common sense facet to the issue as well. Thirty years ago or so, the DC area was fraught with high rates of violent crime and the area remains a national leader in homicides and gun crimes. City Council’s response to the problem of a citizenry beset by armed gangs of drug dealers, armed robbers, and armed home invaders? Disarm the citizens! In the practical sense, that’s pure idiocy.

]]>