AU students will need to adjust to changes to D.C.'s gun laws, which developed once again Tuesday when the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would allow D.C. residents to have semi-automatic weapons in their homes.
The changes began shortly after the Supreme Court stuck down D.C.'s gun ban in June. In the case, D.C. v. Heller, a majority of the justices ruled that D.C. could not ban private citizens from owning guns or require them to be stored unloaded and disassembled.
Since the ruling, Congress and members of the D.C. Council have scrambled to revamp gun legislation to comply with the ruling. The council and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C., strongly oppose the new semi-automatic weapons bill and want the city government to determine D.C.'s gun laws, according to Norton's Web site.
Elaina Houser, a senior in the School of Public Affairs, said she has mixed feelings on the ruling and subsequent changes to D.C.'s gun laws.
"I'm not surprised by the decision because there's a conservative majority on the court, but it's a little annoying they don't think cities should be able to regulate gun ownership," she said.
Although the House bill would allow semi-automatic guns in D.C. homes, few expect the Senate to pass the bill before Congress adjourns at the end of the month, primarily because members of the body do not want to act on polarizing legislation so close to the general election. Congressional legislation would also take the power to take gun legislation from the D.C. Council and make it the responsibility of Congress, according to The Washington Post.
Alexandra Salzman, a senior in the School of International Service, said she thinks D.C. citizens need to be more educated about gun ownership.
"I think we need mandatory gun safety courses to own a gun," she said. "The biggest problem with gun control is that once you own a gun, you can sell it to whomever you want, and there's no regulating it. People who commit crimes don't buy the guns themselves."
AU students got involved in the D.C. gun debate Wednesday during a session of the university's Table Talk series, which featured one of the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case, a gun rights advocate and a representative of the Brady Campaign, which works towards tough gun laws.
George Lyon, a plaintiff in the case and founder of Capitol Gun Owners, said D.C. residents need the right to own guns to protect themselves because of the District's violent crime rate, which he said is three times higher than the national average. According to the Department of Justice Web site, in 2006, D.C. had a rate of 1,508.4 violent crimes per 100,000 crimes compared to the national rate of 473.5 per 100,000 crimes.
"Firearms are tools that can save lives," he said.
David Vice, a lawyer for the Brady Campaign, cited the statistic that it is 22 times more likely for a gun owner or a family member to be injured by a gun than for the gun to be successfully used for self-defense.
Congress's recent involvement in the D.C. gun debate is largely a political stunt to gain favor of pro-gun constituents in an election year, Lyon and Vice said.
Salzman said she thinks the gun laws could be effective in the future.
"I don't think tough gun laws will make a difference in the short term," she said. "But I think gun laws can make a difference long term."
You can reach this staff writer at news@theeagleonline.com.
