D.C. Police Chief Charles Ramsey is doing a live interactive session on the Washington Post web page. He is supposed to be speaking about security measures around D.C., and much of the focus seems to be citizens scared by the sight of police carrying automatic weapons (see my previous post for the Metro Cop and his MP5).
Not wanting to miss the chance to nail the Chief on D.C.'s horrendous gun laws, I asked the following:
Chief Ramsey,I don't expect him to respond.
Since 9/11, levels of gun ownership around the country have skyrocketed. While many claimed that these extra guns would lead to higher rates of murder and mayhem, in fact the opposite has happened. As John Lott has repeatedly pointed out, those states with more liberal gun laws have seen dramatic decreases in crime rates, while those states that decided to adopt more restrictive laws, such as D.C., have seen NOTHING BUT murder and mayhem. Those parallels are most striking when comparing crime free and gun friendly Virginia to Washington, D.C. and Maryland, the two least gun friendly states in the nation, both of which are largely urban war zones.
Since the D.C. gun ban has done nothing to stop crime, and in fact the rise in D.C.'s homicide rate corresponds precisely to its implementation, isn't it time for D.C. to reconsider its foolish policy and recognize the constitution?