Lots of Questions, Little Agreement at D.C. Hearing on Gun Laws
TOOLBOX   Resize
 Save/Share +
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Thursday, July 3, 2008; Page B01
A D.C. Council hearing on the Supreme Court's historic rejection of the 32-year-old District handgun ban drew relatively few witnesses yesterday but generated plenty of questions about what it means and how the city will comply with it.
How does a trigger lock work? Does it take three seconds to prepare a gun to fire or 30 minutes? And what is the definition of "immediate self-defense"?
The high court ruled, 5 to 4, that requiring gun owners to keep their weapons unloaded and disassembled or disabled by a trigger lock violates the Second Amendment because a firearm is not at the ready for immediate self-defense.
Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large) has proposed legislation that would essentially keep the D.C. law but insert a broad "exception" for gun owners who keep their firearms at home for "immediate self-defense." It also would repeal the handgun ban.
The council probably will not vote on the bill until fall, Mendelson said. But Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) is expected to offer an emergency measure July 15, at the last legislative meeting before the council's summer recess, that would put the city in compliance.
But some witnesses said yesterday that the city would still be violating the Constitution if it implemented the "exception" and kept a ban on semiautomatic weapons. Other witnesses disagreed.
It was a relatively short four-hour hearing, with about 20 witnesses and a sparse audience, given the issues of gun control and gun violence in the District and the national debate prompted by last week's ruling.
Ricardo Royal, a firearms educator from Edgewater, offered to train council members in handling a gun so they would have firsthand knowledge about it, an offer declined in the past.
"I am here as Ricardo, the gun-safety man," he told the three members at the Public Safety and Judiciary Committee hearing. "A training program that includes mandatory handling exercises and a section on the specifics of the D.C. law would be a good start."
When questioned by council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3), he recommended 10 hours of training.
Cheh asked whether there were "trigger locks that can be disengaged in three seconds." Royal and other gun rights witnesses said that would be impossible.
Police Lt. Jon Shelton testified that lawyer Walter E. Dellinger III, who argued the city's case before the Supreme Court, was provided a trigger lock with a number code. "He was able to pull it off in a matter of a second or two," Shelton said.
