During a D.C. Council hearing Tuesday on the use of controversial stop-and-frisk tactics in the District, a councilman made quite a statement regarding his views on firearms and law enforcement.
Essentially, he believes law-abiding citizens and police officers should all be unarmed.
“My staff won’t let me tell you that I think we oughta get rid of guns in the city and that police shouldn’t have guns so I’m not gonna tell you that,” said Councilman David Grosso, according to a local CBS affiliate.
While some within the crowd at the Howard University School of Business were taken aback by that suggestion, another councilman noted that it was not all that uncommon overseas for police to patrol the beat without a firearm.
“In other countries not every police enforcement officer is armed with a weapon that’s going to kill somebody,” said councilman Tommy Wells, adding that “It’s one thing to escalate with a billy club versus escalating with a pistol.”
It goes without saying but outright banning all firearms in the District is an absurd idea, not only because it contravenes the Second Amendment rights of D.C. denizens, but also because under the handgun ban that the District had in place up until 2008, when the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional in the landmark Heller decision, crime was higher then than it is today, suggesting that restricting the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms not only doesn’t lower crime, but has the potential to increase it.
Put another way, taking away firearms from law enforcement and law-abiding citizens is every hardened criminal’s dream because an unarmed society is an easily victimized society.
Here’s a related video on the hearing: