DC: One year later, no legal guns stolen and used in crime, or used in crime by owners

[TPaine7]

In fact, police say they have no information that would indicate any gun legally registered since July 17, 2008, has been fired by its owner in defense of life or property, or that one has been stolen or used in the commission of a crime.

...

During the year residents have been allowed to register guns, preliminary police statistics say violent crime and property crime have gone down citywide -- a modest decline that even the most ardent gun rights advocate would have difficulty attributing to legal gun ownership. Police also say they have seized more than 2,000 illegal guns from D.C. streets in the last year. {It's not so modest when you remember that crime is supposed to go up when there is civilian gun ownership--blood is supposed to run in the streets.--TPaine7}

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said the fears of gun-control advocates -- that having more guns would lead to increased gun violence -- were unfounded.

"All the handgun bill people's predictions have proved to be wrong," Mr. LaPierre said.

...

Peter Hamm, spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said the District's new gun regulations are "sensible."

"We think the District has adopted sensible gun laws. If every jurisdiction in the U.S. had reasonable laws and common sense laws ... we would be fine with that sort of system," he said.

Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/17/legal-guns-not-used-one-year-later-no-report-of-on/

So crime has gone down (a little) when we all know there should have been blood running in the streets. No doubt this is a statistical anomaly, and the flood will start soon.

And don't you just love those Brady guys? After fighting tooth and nail to protect DC's draconian gun laws, after having their heads handed to them in court, after having their position rejected by the majority of Americans (who support the Heller decision), they now think that the District's new gun regulations are "sensible."

I bet there are antis too stupid to see through them. I wouldn't be surprised if some showed up in this thread.

[old mark]

1. Thing is, this has been TYPICAL when ridiculous gun regulation is

overturned, but the anti's - like the GOP - just won't see the facts.

markO8)

[zipplewrath]

5. Well, one did

I was far from a ardent anti-gun advocate, but was relatively tolerant of gun restrictions, politically speaking. Over the years though the facts just never really supported all the underlying assumptions. I'm probably not exactly in concert with the "gun rights advocates" on many things, but the vast majority of proposed gun restrictions I see proposed are the sort of silly little "politically viable" actions that have little hope of accomplishing anything. I haven't seen a "gun law" proposed in years that would particularly get my support, and generally I find that those proposing them don't particularly impress me either.

[TPaine7]

2. There's been at least one drive-by by a too-stupid anti

who had nothing substantive to contribute, but didn't like the facts presented in the OP. Antis don't like the truth, but can't do anything with it--so they lash out from the shadows.

Gutless, stupid, and content-free.

Yep, definitely anti(s).

[nevergiveup]

3. According to a report last week

violent crimes have gone down in most major U.S. cities so there may be factors other than the Heller decision involved in DC crime stats.

[TPaine7]

4. I agree.

Actually I'm not saying that guns caused crime to fall; I'm saying they didn't make blood run in the streets. I'm saying they didn't get stolen and used in crime. I'm saying that they weren't used to kill innocents when their owners "snapped".

At least according to police reports.

[zipplewrath]

6. The data problem

With out taking any sort of "side" on this, there is a very good chance that the total number of weapons in DC hasn't changed very much over the last year. It may merely be that more people are admitting to possession now that it is "legal".

[JonQ]

7. Problem with using logic on anti-gun nuts

is that they didn't come to their position logically, they came to it emotionally.

To rip off Dr. House: if you could reason with gun grabbers there would be no gun grabbers.

[eqfan592]

9. wow, great poin there, Jon! (nt)

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

8. Nothing better than having the grabbers eat crow.

[Deadric Damodred]

10. People who are fanatical about a cause...

...do not eat crow, they ignore the crow and keep repeating their lies as truth.