I love good news.
The District of Columbia was recently found to be out of line in requiring special reasons to fear crime as suitable grounds for issuing a concealed carry permit. Read the decision here.
Civil rights advocates will recall when the Supreme Court of the United States ruled, in Heller v. District of Columbia, that DC was out of line in prohibiting its residents from owning handguns for self-defense. Thus began a long and fascinating chain of litigation; I expect you’re all familiar with that, and I won’t bore you by recounting it here.
As I and others predicted, DC put up enough red tape to constitute a concertina wire to keep its citizens from carrying guns to protect themselves. One element of that was the District’s requirement for the applicant for a carry permit to show that they had already been violently attacked, or at least, were more likely than the average person to suffer such a thing.
The states break down into “may issue” (translation: we can give you a permit if we feel like it) and “shall issue” (we have to give you the permit or show just cause why not, just cause being that we have sound reason to believe you’re a criminal, you’re nuts, or you otherwise would be even more of a danger to society if you were armed.)
Logic cringes at the thought. You have to have already been attacked by someone trying to unlawfully kill you, before you can have a permit to protect yourself from that? Um, duh, how do you survive that first attempt long enough to apply for the permit in hopes of warding it off the second time?
Those who know me, know that for decades I’ve pointed out the fact that the defensive firearm is a direct analog to a fire extinguisher. Each of those items is an emergency safety/rescue tool, whose purpose is to allow the ordinary citizen who becomes the first responder to ward off death or great bodily harm until the designated public safety professionals can get there to help. The gun doesn’t make you a cop and doesn’t mean you don’t need cops. The fire extinguisher doesn’t make you a trained firefighter and doesn’t mean you no longer need firefighters. “Emergency safety/rescue tool…first responder…the one there on the ground when the conflagration breaks out, and the one right now positioned to be the best candidate to stop something horrible from happening.”
How would the American public react if they were told they could only have a fire extinguisher in their home or car if they had already gone through the horror of a full-blown house fire? That’s what the Bloombergs of the world are asking for when they demand “special reason” to carry a firearm in self-defense. Just a different type of life-threatening danger, is all. But with one stark and important difference: No fire ever stopped by itself because the victim picked up an extinguisher, but a HUGE number of violent attacks are broken off by the criminal as soon as he realizes he has met armed resistance, without a shot being fired.
Thanks to Alan Gura, the rock star of pro-armed-citizen litigation these days…and to the Second Amendment Foundation, which hired him to bring this case to its currently successful conclusion.
And, by the way, thanks again to all here who voted for a President who put one more pro-gun, pro-self defense Justice on the Supreme Court.
I’ve been on the Board of Trustees of the Second Amendment Foundation for many years. I’ve been proud of that. I’ve never been prouder than now.