D.C. Council proves itself to be rabidly anti-gun, once again

The Washington D.C. City Council epitomizes everything that’s wrong with this country.

Case in point, this recent comment from Democratic council member Marion Barry, who also served as a four-term mayor for the District from 1979-1991.

“I don’t believe in guns. I don’t believe in carrying guns,” said Barry, in reference to a ruling by a federal judge that overturned the District’s ban on concealed carry and tasked the council with drafting legislation to create an issuing standard. “I think the public ought to understand that all of us here are doing something we really don’t want to do.”

In other words, Barry doesn’t believe in the Second Amendment to the Constitution. He doesn’t believe that law-abiding citizens should have the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense outside the home.

What’s frightening is that he is not alone. The entire city council feels that guns should be banned, which is why it voiced reluctance to vote for a highly restrictive ‘may-issue’ emergency concealed carry law earlier this week. Even what is now considered to be the toughest CCW standard in the country wasn’t strict enough because it doesn’t outright ban gun owners from being allowed to carry in the public square.

“We really don’t want to move forward with allowing more guns in the District of Columbia, but we all know we have to be compliant with what the courts say,” said Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4).

Likewise, council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) said she was “deeply disappointed” that the ban was ruled unconstitutional and that permitting concealed carry did “grievous harm to public safety.”

Of course, all of those comments are completely laughable given what the statistics say about concealed carry. As concealed carry rights have been expanded over the past two decades to the point where now all 50 states have legalized concealed carry, crime (property crime, violent crime and the homicide rate) have all uniformly decreased leading any rational individual to conclude at the very least that permissive concealed carry laws do not increase crime rates — if anything the complete opposite is true, more law-abiding citizens carrying firearms for self-defense reduces crime.

Yet, in the face of such overwhelming evidence, the D.C. council unanimously approved a bill Monday that through its harsh requirements effectively denies one the right to carry.

The emergency bill requires one to pass an extensive background check process, complete 18 hours of gun-safety training and provide to the police chief a “good reason to fear injury to his or her person or property” or “any other proper reason for carrying a pistol.”

It’s that discretionary aspect of the bill, the police chief’s power to arbitrarily deny one the right to carry, that will likely prevent many law-abiding citizens from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

As Second Amendment attorney Alan Gura, who lead the charge to repeal the ban in federal court, noted, the emergency ‘may-issue’ bill is pretty much a new way of maintaining the old status quo.

D.C. council member Marion Barry doesn't believe in guns.  What else doesn't he believe in?  Free speech?  (Photo: Wiki)

D.C. council member Marion Barry doesn’t believe in guns. What other Constitutional Freedoms does he not believe in? Free speech? (Photo: Wiki)

“The court instructed the city to treat the carrying of handguns as a right rooted in the constitutional interest in self-defense,” Gura told the Washington Post.

“It’s not much progress to move from a system where ­licenses are not available to a system where licenses are only available if the city feels like issuing them,” he added. “It’s something of a joke.”

Gura plans to bring the emergency bill before the judge who initially struck down the ban in July, U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr., on Oct. 17.

“They have to explain why this is different than what currently exists,” Gura said. “I don’t believe they can do that.”

Gura’s correct. It’s not different. It’s just another way to infringe on the Constitutional rights of District citizens. But D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray, who said he will sign the measure, feels otherwise.

“This bill ensures that we will be able to meet the requirements of the Constitution while maintaining the maximum amount of safeguards possible to protect our residents, visitors, workers and public-safety officers,” Gray said.

On one hand there’s reason to believe that the Council will get away with a may-issue standard as states like Maryland and New Jersey have similar concealed carry laws on the books that require the sign off of a CLEO. But on the other hand, there’s hope in an appeals court ruling in California that struck down the state’s may-issue standard as being unconstitutional.

Bottom line, the current battle over the ‘may-issue’ standard in D.C. is one that’s being fought nationwide and until the Supreme Court weighs in on the matter and finally puts the issue to rest, one can expect to see more appeals and challenges from both sides of the gun divide.

Meanwhile, in D.C. the emergency bill will be in effect for 90 days. After which, the council will re-examine the law, hold public hearings on it and ultimately vote on whether to make it permanent, pending Congressional review.

Hopefully the council has a come to Jesus moment with respect to concealed carry between now and then, but don’t hold your breath. The council has proven itself to be rabidly anti-gun time and time again.

{ 10 comments… add one }
  • rt66paul December 8, 2016, 11:54 am

    Not believing in guns is just fine, don’t buy one, don’t shoot one. Not believing that other people should have guns is another story and is trying to take away my right to self protection. The fact that I am past my prime means that I would be toast if my house was taken over by a group of people looking to steal from me and mine or hurt me and mine. I have enougth defense that they would be toast in my home. Sadly, that doesn’t apply for me in Ca. LA County is a may issue county and I am not personal friends with the chief, nor do I have a business that requires that I have a firearm for protection. I sincerly hope and pray that Trump will do all in his power to make the 2nd amendment the law of the land.

  • ej harbord September 29, 2014, 11:00 pm

    i love the double standard when it comes to libtards and supreme court decisions;
    god help you if you even try to put a reasonable restriction on mothers murdering their unborn babys.try to make them get permits for that or undergo background checks or get a doctors permission to abort!!!!!
    but the second bill of rights amendment oh that’s just the rambleings of dead white slaveowners and we can walk all over it.
    we should make them get a permit to breed and put ted nugent in charge of the decision to issue

  • Bill September 29, 2014, 2:53 pm

    The only thing surprising here is that anyone is surprised by the audacity demonstrated by this corrupt city power structure. DC is infamous for incompetence while blaming everyone else, anyone else, for it’s problems. And the power brokers maintain their positions by a uniquely cynical brand of cronyism…..”pander rather than do the hard work”. Meanwhile the very people that repeatedly vote them in continue to recive services well below the national standards! And local pols who try to tell the truth and actually deal with issues, get run out of town. These gun laws are essentially part of the pandering.

  • Beachhawk September 29, 2014, 12:55 pm

    Marion Berry is a convicted felon and not entitled to own a firearm or ammunition. Figures if he can’t have one, no one else in the District should have on either. The rest of the Council have to find someone or something to blame for their soaring crime rate. They cannot blame the violent criminals who they consider downtrodden and oppressed, so they blame the guns. Is everyone on the Council so stupid that they actually believe criminals will obey the D.C. gun laws. And don’t expect the chief of police to ever issue a concealed weapons permit to anyone except personal friends of council members, wealthy residents and influential politicians. It’s a very corrupt system which will lead to influence peddling and bribery.

  • Slick-Willy September 29, 2014, 12:14 pm

    I’ve said repeatedly that gun control advocates lie about their intentions. The former mayor, reformed cocaine smoker and current council member Barry alluded to their true intention when he said “I don’t believe in guns. I don’t believe in carrying guns”. Gun control advocates aren’t in favor of gun control at all – they want to completely remove guns from our society. They rarely say it because it’s not realistic. Not yet anyway. So they set their sights lower for now and they push for gun control – more restrictions. Ultimately however what the Marion Barry’s truly want is the elimination of guns (ALL guns) from this country.

  • demscray September 29, 2014, 11:54 am

    I thought convicted felons were barred from holding public office….oh, wait!… we’re talking about DC here.

  • Robert Bostick September 29, 2014, 11:33 am

    Gee, I just wonder how many people are carrying guns concealed in defiance of the constitutionally corrupt DC council? Does the mayor or any DC council member have armed personal security? If so why if it is so safe? I was there in 1998 and guess what? I carried my pistol with me all the time. With such a high crime rate why should I not to defend my family if necessary. If not necessary the pistol stays out of sight. I guess the way to send a message to the council and Feds who control the DC area is to put the brakes on any tourism plans we might have. That goes for New Jersey, Maryland ( I loved the area there but will never come back ) New York and any other city/state that think they have the right to deny my constitutional rights. As the saying goes, “let the purse talk and they will listen.”

  • Rene September 29, 2014, 11:31 am

    Marion Berry’s comments are interesting, as a convicted felon he lost the right to own or carry a firearm. I wonder if before he was convicted whether he made a habit of owing and carrying a firearm. I’d bet that as mayor he surely had armed protection. Of course, I also wonder if he is surrounded by armed security today

  • Mike L September 29, 2014, 11:16 am

    You realize that Barry, a convicted felon, is not supposed to carry a gun!

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend