The U.S. Supreme Court is now hearing on whether or not to strike down Chicago’s long-standing ban on handguns. Predictably, socialists are enraged:

Otis McDonald, 76, lives in the same crime-riddled, gang-ruled Chicago neighborhood where 16-year-old honor student Derrion Albert was beaten to death by teen-age thugs. His home has been burglarized three times, he has been mugged on the street, and he fears for his life.

On Monday, Mr. McDonald’s lawyers began their quest on his behalf to have the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) overturn his city’s strict ban on handguns in the home. The McDonald v City of Chicago decision will be rendered by SCOTUS some time in June.

“In my home, this is the only time I worry,” McDonald said. “There’s more illegal guns coming into this city than the police can take away from them. So if I’ve got a gun, and if others have guns in their homes to protect themselves, then that’s one thing that police would have to worry about less.”

For nearly 30 years, Chicago has banned possession of handguns inside city limits, one of the most stringent gun laws in the country. And for nearly 30 years, Chicago has held the dubious distinction of being at or near the top of United States cities in gun-related violent crime.

Clearly, the gun ban has been effective — but only against law-abiding citizens.

What is at stake

Special-interest gun control groups use the trite argument that lifting the decades-old ban will increase the prevalence of guns and the level of violence — a claim repeatedly and statistically proven false in states and municipalities across America. Second Amendment proponents respond that prohibition prevents law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves. They also rightly point out that the illegal gun trade and gun-related violent crime have continued to flourish in Chicago despite the ban.

In 2008, SCOTUS overturned Washington D.C.’s gun ban after hearing Heller v the District of Columbia. The question now before SCOTUS is whether to extend that ruling beyond a federal jurisdiction.

Bill of Rights defenders have argued that striking down the Chicago gun ban would actually lead to safer neighborhoods by giving citizens the ability to arm and defend themselves. As proof, they cite the lower per-capita violent crime statistics in cities and the 40 states that not only allow handgun ownership but concealed carry as well.

But of most importance, they contend that any prohibition infringes on the fundamental right of all Americans to bear arms.

What happened in D.C.?

The 2008 Heller decision struck down Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban and gunlock requirements. Unsurprisingly, gun control advocates predicted disaster.

They were wrong.

When the Heller case was decided, Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty warned: "More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence." Knowing that Chicago’s gun laws would soon face a similar legal challenge, anti-Second Amendment Mayor Richard Daley said that he and other mayors across the country were "outraged" by the decision and predicted more deaths from Wild West-style shootouts.

It never happened.

Quite the contrary, murders in Washington, D.C. plummeted by an astounding 25 percent in 2009, dropping from 186 murders in 2008 to 140. That translates to a murder rate now down to 23.5 per 100,000 people, D.C.’s lowest since 1967.

In fact, Washington’s drop was several times greater than that for other similar-sized cities. According to preliminary estimates by the FBI, nationwide murders fell by a relatively more modest 10 percent last year and by about 8 percent in other similarly-sized cities of a half-million to one million people.

This is no surprise to anyone who has followed how crime rates dramatically change for the better after gun bans are repealed. It is, however, quite dismaying to the socialists that our nation’s capital is a safer place thanks to the Heller decision.

Prohibition never works

The failures of gun bans in the U.S. are frequently blamed on lax gun restrictions in other states. But the experiences of other countries, even in island nations that have banned handguns and in countries where borders are easy to monitor, do not support this claim.

For example, when handgun bans were enacted in Ireland and Jamaica, in 1972 and 1974, respectively, murder rates doubled over the following decade. More recently, England and Wales banned handguns in 1997. The result? Deaths, injuries, and violence from gun crime more than doubled over the next seven years.

The rising tide

Ultimately, the SCOTUS decision comes down to whether the Second Amendment applies to the states in the same way that the 14th Amendment has been applied to most of the Bill of Rights. It is important to remember that the 14th Amendment was in large part passed to protect newly freed blacks from Southern states passing laws to disarm them.

How one sees guns affecting crime is significant to one’s interpretation of the Constitution. To many Bill of Rights advocates, gun bans are not only unconstitutional, they are traditionally and inherently racist.

If Chicago’s prohibition is overturned, it will open the door to much more litigation against state and municipal laws which limit or completely ban the American right to keep and bear arms. And that’s a good thing, because all of our God-given rights are under assault now more than ever.

It’s gladdening to see liberty finally — at long last — awakening in America.

Hype and Chains.

background:

Image: Mr. Otis McDonald, American
ChicagoGunCase.com
Supreme Court Weighs Chicago’s Strict Gun Ban
Supreme Court hears Chicago gun ban case
Will the Supreme Court Recognize the Truth About Chicago’s Handgun Ban?