Apparently those of us living in the nation's capital are being denied our Second Amendment rights and, well, she's just trying to help.This just in: you are being denied your Second Amendment freedoms. Washington, D.C. enjoys one of the highest gun crime rates in the nation. Any clues why? Hello? Anyone? Bueller?
The whole tone of this "editorial" is utterly condescending and completely anti-gun. It's uninformed, and filled with half-truths and out-and-out lies:
There's the fact that the courts have decided that laws like the District's, which prohibits handguns, aren't any sort of violation of the Constitution, so we aren't really being denied anything - that's probably why the senator and her friends aren't going to court to have the D.C. rules thrown out.But wait, don't forget ignorance:
But perhaps the most confounding part of this proposal is this: why is the Republican Party, the party of states' rights, deciding that in this case the federal government should supersede the will of the people living in the District? When did the GOP suddenly become the party that believes the federal government knows best?State's rights? Washington is unique in that, under the Constitution, Congress has ultimate say over how it is governed, even though the 563,000 residents have no senator and only a nonvoting delegate in the House.
Once again, it's just proof that anti-gunners will say anything to advance their misguided cause.