A Gun Ban That Misfired: What I saw as a prosecutor in D.C., makes me wary of strict firearms laws

Wall Street Journal ^ | 01/16/2013 | Jeffrey Scott Shapiro

[SeekAndFind]

In the wake of the horrific elementary-school shootings in Newtown, Conn., last month, many Americans, desperate to do something in response, have decided that much stricter gun control is the answer. Democrats have proposed reinstating the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein has proposed legislation that would even restrict the use of some semiautomatic handguns.

As a former prosecutor in Washington, D.C., who enforced firearms and ammunition cases while a severe local gun ban was still in effect, I am skeptical of the benefits that many imagine will result from additional gun-control efforts. I dislike guns, but I believe that a nationwide firearms crackdown would place an undue burden on law enforcement and endanger civil liberties while potentially increasing crime.

The D.C. gun ban, enacted in 1976, prohibited anyone other than law-enforcement officers from carrying a firearm in the city. Residents were even barred from keeping guns in their homes for self-defense.

Some in Washington who owned firearms before the ban were allowed to keep them as long as the weapons were disassembled or trigger-locked at all times. According to the law, trigger locks could not be removed for self-defense even if the owner was being robbed at gunpoint. The only way anyone could legally possess a firearm in the District without a trigger lock was to obtain written permission from the D.C. police. The granting of such permission was rare.

The gun ban had an unintended effect: It emboldened criminals because they knew that law-abiding District residents were unarmed and powerless to defend themselves. Violent crime increased after the law was enacted, with homicides rising to 369 in 1988, from 188 in 1976 when the ban started. By 1993, annual homicides had reached 454.

[New Jersey Realist]

Residents were even barred from keeping guns in their homes for self-defense.

That is unconstitutional but besides that since DC is 90+ percent black why isn't Jessie and the boys touting Jim Crow laws?????

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Follow the money. Jessie backs the gangs.

[Jim Noble]

since DC is 90+ percent black

50.7% in 2010, and falling fast.

[uncommonsense]

Unlawful to use a gun against a home invasion? It’s all about the kids, right? It’s not about outcomes, it’s about good intentions. Control everything, protect no one.

[Travis McGee]

[Blood of Tyrants]

“Sen. Dianne Feinstein has proposed legislation that would even restrict the use of some semiautomatic handguns”

Not yet. Feinswine hasn’t introduced anything, yet. I checked over at the LOC website.

[waredbird]

It seems to me that there is another aspect of why we need to be armed that I don’t see often mentioned. We are at war. There is a loving and peaceful religion out there that has declared war on us. They want us dead and there could be more than a billion of them out there. Logic would dictate more 30 round clips not less.

[kevkrom]

The gun ban had an unintended effect: It emboldened criminals because they knew that law-abiding District residents were unarmed and powerless to defend themselves.

Unintended, perhaps, but entirely predictable to anyone with half a brain.

[SkyDancer]

Since that Prohibition thingie worked out so well.

[Cboldt]

-- Unintended, perhaps .. --

Or, perhaps not. Maybe the legislators intended exactly the outcome that followed. This prosecutor at least was part of the problem, and perhaps still is.

The only interests the legislators, prosecutors and courts are looking out for is their own. More crime is more business for them.

[chaosagent]

“Sen. Dianne Feinstein has proposed legislation that would even restrict the use of some semiautomatic handguns”

Not yet. Feinswine hasn’t introduced anything, yet. I checked over at the LOC website.

---

‘Proposed’ is not the same thing as ‘introduced’. ‘Proposed’ means she’s talked about it and said it would be a good idea.

And she has.

[DaveA37]

“As a former prosecutor in Washington, D.C., who enforced firearms and ammunition cases while a severe local gun ban was still in effect, I am skeptical of the benefits that many imagine will result from additional gun-control efforts. I dislike guns”.....

That’s like saying, “I dislike hammers, hand saws or screw drivers”. They are nothing more than tools, as is a gun. A gun is a tool, period. It’s not the saw that makes a bad carpenter, or the bent nail that makes a bad carpenter, its how he USES those tools. Same goes for a gun. I have shot thousands of guns and never, ever have I killed ANYONE. Just because I owned a gun did not make me a bad person. I own hammers, saws and screwdrivers too and I’m a pretty good user of those tools as well.