The court ruled that “the bar on carrying a pistol within the home, amounts to a complete prohibition on the lawful use of handguns for self-defense. As such, we hold it unconstitutional.”
Fine and wonderful, but if a prohibition against keeping a gun at home for protection is unconstitutional (which of course it is and always has been) how about saving your life while outside your home? I guess self defense is still to be regarded as a revocable privilege in DC unless you sequester yourself inside your home? Is human life in one location more important than human life in another, and subject to less protection?? Who is going to offer each of us a “Human Rights Map” wherein we can learn which parts of our neighborhoods allow us the right to live and in which areas we must submit to any and all criminals’ demands?
Opponents of gun rights expressed disappointment and anger over the decision.
Naturally. It means there will be a small reduction in DC area crime which in turn will further destroy their entire premise– the idea that creating a monopoly on gun possession, reserving guns strictly for criminals, will somehow reduce crime. The whole premise is of course insane from the get-go, that is, unless you’re a criminal or a hater of mankind, in which case it makes perfect sense as a ruse.
And if a law against being armed at home in DC is once more unconstitutional (after a lengthy “Constitutional Hiatus” in which many people have had their lives ruined as a result) lets haul out all the NYC laws and have a look-see, then move on to Chicago and San Franfreako, et al.