Friday, March 09, 2007

The VPC Propaganda Machine Responds

In my earlier post on today's ruling by the DC Circuit Court panel, I said:

Truth, liberty, and the respect for people's rights won out over your loathsome campaign of hyperbole, deceit and fear-mongering. Deal with it.

So, who's up for a little hyperbole, deceit and fear-mongering this evening?

I give you this pathetic attempt at intellectual discourse from the Huffington Post, written by gun-grabber extraordinaire, Josh Sugarmann, founder and executive director of the Violence Policy Center, one of the major anti-gun rights lobbying groups in the country.

Court to DC: Handguns for All!

Well, that didn't take long. He couldn't even make it past the title of the post without distorting the reality of the court's decision.

[ADDED: On second thought, the title's a pretty good one, seeing how the criminal portion of the population currently enjoys unfettered access, via the black market, to all the guns they want. Paving the way for the law-abiding folks to arm themselves could, quite thankfully, lead to "handguns for all".]

This morning the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in the case of Parker, et al v. the District of Columbia, overturned the District of Columbia's handgun ban on Second Amendment grounds. Under the decision, which is contrary to the overwhelming weight of legal authority, District residents would now be allowed to keep handguns in their homes.

The "weight of legal authority" was so "overwhelming", in fact, that he was forced to leave it in the car when he got to work this morning, so he was unable to to post a single reference to back up this assertion.

[ADDED: That would be, what? The "legal authority" of a governmental entity to enact and enforce unconstitutional laws that violate the rights of the citizenry?]

Since its enactment, overturning the DC handgun ban has been the Holy Grail for the National Rifle Association and its supporters. it hasn't.

Pending appeal, it looks like they may have finally achieved their goal. And if the case, which concludes that "the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms," is heard on appeal by the U.S. Supreme Court, it has the potential to lay the groundwork for literally every local, state, and federal gun law in America to be challenged: from the federal ban on gun possession by felons to the ban on the manufacture of new, fully automatic machine guns.

Because, according to Mr. Sugarmann, things are better the way they are now in the nation's capital, where the drug-dealers and carjackers - people not known for possessing too deep a respect for the law - can have all the guns they want, and their victims are left to defend themselves by honking car horns, blowing plastic whistles, and cowering in terror.

In a twist more disturbing than ironic, the court's decision was issued the same day that a new study, Chief Concerns--Violent Crime in America: 24 Months of Alarming Trends, was issued by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF). The study warned of increasing violent crime and the facilitating role of firearms...

So, let me see if I understand him correctly.

The chances of a defenseless citizen becoming a victim of violent crime, according to the study he's choosing to cite here, are on the rise. And, he finds it somehow "disturbing" that a US Court would rule that these defenseless victims-to-be have a right to defend themselves???

In fact, the high rate of violent crime in the "gun-free", peaceful Utopia of Washington DC, and the desire to protect themselves from said violence, were key components of the plaintiff's case. From that last paragraph, now, it's hard to tell exactly whose side Mr. Sugarmann is arguing for here.

But, let there be no doubt whose side he's on.

While today's decision is a dream come true for America's gun lobby and gunmakers, it may mark the beginning of a long, national nightmare from which we will never recover as a nation.

Ah, yes, the "nightmare" of having free citizens walking the streets of America, and resting comfortably in their homes, able to provide for their own security without having to rely on the government to maintain their very existence.

Rosie, hold me! I'm scared!

My guess is, Sugarmann was under the impression that he could go to the Huffington Post blog to have his distorted viewpoint validated by the regular readers over there, an audience perhaps more friendly to someone with his anti-2A mentality. Or so he thought.

After reading the early comments left there, most of which seem to be grounded in reality and rational thought, I'm guessing he's on the verge of joining Rosie O'Donnell for an extended therapy session. Or he'll simply write a follow-up post, in which he dismisses these commenters armed, racist, redneck thugs of the Cheney/Halliburton Cabal.

Finally, a federal court that can read. It is really not hard just read what the Founding Fathers said. They were absolutely, positively talking about an individual right. And guess what, DC's crime rate will go down because of this. FACT: every state that has passed a right to carry law has seen its violent crime rate plunge. Every one.
Again a federal court has finally read the Founding Fathers thoughts on the 2nd Amendment.

Let freedom ring! The end of the forcible disarmament of American citizens may be in sight. For far too long, the boot of civilian disarmament has been on our necks, but WE SHALL OVERCOME!

This is silly and hyperbolic, at best. Long national nightmare? Are you serious? Look at DC's homicide rate. My numbers, from the 2005 FBI UCR, show it to be the fourth highest in the country, and that's with a nearly total handgun ban. Clearly, gun control hasn't made the life of the residents of DC any safer.

Oh, I didn't recognize your name at first, then I looked up who you were. Nevermind, you're never going to look at this from an open minded perspective.

"...the beginning of a long, national nightmare from which we will never recover..."

Obviously you've never read the crime section in the D.C. paper. Yeah, let's ban we banned drugs! Hey, wait a minute, drugs availability is worse than ever. Here's a tip - how about punishment for criminals.

Also, I notice that the first comment over there came in at 4:21 PM, and that the next five comments came over the next 45 minutes, up until 5:06 PM. Yet, not one comment posted since then, and it's been over 2-1/2 hours now.

Surely, neither Mr. Sugarmann, nor the moderators at the Huffington Post, would be running away from a fact-based discussion on the subject matter at hand by shutting down comments on that post.


UPDATE: Scratch that. Comments are still open. This one just came in.

"Today's decision flies in the face of laws that have helped decrease gun violence in the District of Columbia."

Could DC Mayor Adrian Fenty have made a dumber statement. Mr. Mayor, you live in the most dangerous city in America. Year in and year out, your city is the murder capital of the nation.

Well, not quite. In 2005, for instance, DC fell to #4 on the list. But, I digress...

Your laws aren't protecting anyone except the violent criminals who prey upon your defenseless citizens. The ruling of the district court today made those criminals' jobs more dangerous.

Where's the fanclub, Josh?