<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: D.C. Handgun Restriction May Be Deadly</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:51:04 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: pistol packin' pappy</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-76313</link>
		<dc:creator>pistol packin' pappy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:18:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-76313</guid>
		<description>i worked in fairfax county back in 86 til 88, and the killings were in the hundreds every week in d.c. that was when the ban was in effect. now the law abiding denezens might be able to protect themselves. thank goodness for shootin irons and the second amendment. hopefully they won&#039;t price the permits so high a person has to rob a likker store to afford it. as for home protection, i keep my old ford pickup in the bedroom closet, it can take out 4 or 5 at a time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i worked in fairfax county back in 86 til 88, and the killings were in the hundreds every week in d.c. that was when the ban was in effect. now the law abiding denezens might be able to protect themselves. thank goodness for shootin irons and the second amendment. hopefully they won&#8217;t price the permits so high a person has to rob a likker store to afford it. as for home protection, i keep my old ford pickup in the bedroom closet, it can take out 4 or 5 at a time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Galt</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-76100</link>
		<dc:creator>John Galt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:00:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-76100</guid>
		<description>An important variable not addressed by Bob Owens is the barrel length of the revolver.  Many revolvers with short barrels when loaded with factory ammo generate poor ballistics.  Worse even than significantly smaller semi-auto cartridges due to the types of powders commonly used.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important variable not addressed by Bob Owens is the barrel length of the revolver.  Many revolvers with short barrels when loaded with factory ammo generate poor ballistics.  Worse even than significantly smaller semi-auto cartridges due to the types of powders commonly used.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fen</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-75501</link>
		<dc:creator>Fen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:18:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-75501</guid>
		<description>&quot;I would expect most people who would own guns legally in DC to... use them only in extreme home defense... in the attempt of a home invasion.&quot;

Unlikely. Under DC restrictions, if I wake in the middle of the night to the sounds of instrusion, I still have to 1) remove my trigger lock and 2) load my weapon before I can engage. I wonder if I could even practice that, a few dry runs to speed up the process, without running afoul of the DC law.

Thank God I live in Maryland(?) I don&#039;t care what stupid laws they pass - I&#039;m keeping my weapon loaded, safe and ready at a moments notice, just like the Marine Corps taught me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I would expect most people who would own guns legally in DC to&#8230; use them only in extreme home defense&#8230; in the attempt of a home invasion.&#8221;</p>
<p>Unlikely. Under DC restrictions, if I wake in the middle of the night to the sounds of instrusion, I still have to 1) remove my trigger lock and 2) load my weapon before I can engage. I wonder if I could even practice that, a few dry runs to speed up the process, without running afoul of the DC law.</p>
<p>Thank God I live in Maryland(?) I don&#8217;t care what stupid laws they pass &#8211; I&#8217;m keeping my weapon loaded, safe and ready at a moments notice, just like the Marine Corps taught me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: whiskey</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-74645</link>
		<dc:creator>whiskey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:24:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-74645</guid>
		<description>This article is pure bunk.

Criminals and law abiding gun owners treat guns differently.

Criminals use guns as disposable tools. Their primary considerations are cheap, and concealable. Since they&#039;re illegal, and they must not be spotted with an unregistered handgun, particularly if they already have a record. Thus the preference for small, cheap, disposable handguns. The Makarov is the gun of choice, cheap, reliable, accurate enough, and deadly enough at close range.

Law abiding citizens owning handguns want them for protection. The gun MUST work and be powerful enough and controllable enough to stop a deadly attack. Concealment IS important, but not as important for lawful concealed carry owners, and not an issue at all for those who use the gun only for home protection.

For home defense, a reliable .38 special or .357 loaded with .38 special (no overpenetration and shooting the neighbor) is desired, the gun is easy to use under extreme stress, reliable, and easy to make safe quickly.

For concealed carry, &quot;midsize&quot; autoloaders are both lighter and conceal more easily. Glock, Colt, Sig, Smith and Wesson, various 1911 companies like Kimber and Springfield, CZ etc all make outstanding semi-auto pistols that are relatively flat and light. Most people will not carry because it&#039;s a pain in the ass, expensive to get certified/qualified/licensed, the holster alone will run in excess of $200 and is worth it. You will commit essentially to carrying around 5 lbs of metal and plastic on your hip every day. Some will only carry light/small 5-shot revolvers from Smith and Wesson or Ruger. Pocket revolvers. Hard to shoot, but reliable, definitely lighter and smaller. Expensive though, some will run into the $500 range.

For those at risk however, it can be worth it. Small pocket revolvers require expensive and painful practice, they are hard to shoot and often hurt (recoil being nasty in lightweight revolvers).

I would expect most people who would own guns legally in DC to own affordable .38/.357 revolvers, shoot them infrequently, and use them only in extreme home defense, for example an equalizer for elderly in the attempt of a home invasion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This article is pure bunk.</p>
<p>Criminals and law abiding gun owners treat guns differently.</p>
<p>Criminals use guns as disposable tools. Their primary considerations are cheap, and concealable. Since they&#8217;re illegal, and they must not be spotted with an unregistered handgun, particularly if they already have a record. Thus the preference for small, cheap, disposable handguns. The Makarov is the gun of choice, cheap, reliable, accurate enough, and deadly enough at close range.</p>
<p>Law abiding citizens owning handguns want them for protection. The gun MUST work and be powerful enough and controllable enough to stop a deadly attack. Concealment IS important, but not as important for lawful concealed carry owners, and not an issue at all for those who use the gun only for home protection.</p>
<p>For home defense, a reliable .38 special or .357 loaded with .38 special (no overpenetration and shooting the neighbor) is desired, the gun is easy to use under extreme stress, reliable, and easy to make safe quickly.</p>
<p>For concealed carry, &#8220;midsize&#8221; autoloaders are both lighter and conceal more easily. Glock, Colt, Sig, Smith and Wesson, various 1911 companies like Kimber and Springfield, CZ etc all make outstanding semi-auto pistols that are relatively flat and light. Most people will not carry because it&#8217;s a pain in the ass, expensive to get certified/qualified/licensed, the holster alone will run in excess of $200 and is worth it. You will commit essentially to carrying around 5 lbs of metal and plastic on your hip every day. Some will only carry light/small 5-shot revolvers from Smith and Wesson or Ruger. Pocket revolvers. Hard to shoot, but reliable, definitely lighter and smaller. Expensive though, some will run into the $500 range.</p>
<p>For those at risk however, it can be worth it. Small pocket revolvers require expensive and painful practice, they are hard to shoot and often hurt (recoil being nasty in lightweight revolvers).</p>
<p>I would expect most people who would own guns legally in DC to own affordable .38/.357 revolvers, shoot them infrequently, and use them only in extreme home defense, for example an equalizer for elderly in the attempt of a home invasion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: New DC handgun ban would promote more dangerous weapons &#171; Internet Scofflaw</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-74464</link>
		<dc:creator>New DC handgun ban would promote more dangerous weapons &#171; Internet Scofflaw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 22:10:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-74464</guid>
		<description>[...] ban on magazine-fed guns (which, no joke, they call &#8220;semiautomatic machine guns&#8221;).  Bob Owens observes that forcing people to adopt revolvers will actually encourage the purchase of more [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] ban on magazine-fed guns (which, no joke, they call &#8220;semiautomatic machine guns&#8221;).  Bob Owens observes that forcing people to adopt revolvers will actually encourage the purchase of more [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RAH</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-74299</link>
		<dc:creator>RAH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:59:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-74299</guid>
		<description>The killing power of the 357 mag in revolvers is well known. The 9mm is not as effective.
 
 I read about a  man who worked for the police morturary, state that it took  numerous rounds for a 9mm or 38 auto to kill a man  from his experience. He said the 45 ACP or 357 magnum killed with less shots.

At the time of the original regulation the police used revolvers and there was a prejudice against semi auto pistols.

The semi auto is now the preferred weapon rather than a revolver. There are pro and cons for each one.

The fastest shot is with a revovler and the speed is incredible. Check you tube for videos.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The killing power of the 357 mag in revolvers is well known. The 9mm is not as effective.</p>
<p> I read about a  man who worked for the police morturary, state that it took  numerous rounds for a 9mm or 38 auto to kill a man  from his experience. He said the 45 ACP or 357 magnum killed with less shots.</p>
<p>At the time of the original regulation the police used revolvers and there was a prejudice against semi auto pistols.</p>
<p>The semi auto is now the preferred weapon rather than a revolver. There are pro and cons for each one.</p>
<p>The fastest shot is with a revovler and the speed is incredible. Check you tube for videos.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Broadsword</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-74264</link>
		<dc:creator>Broadsword</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 14:12:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-74264</guid>
		<description>No javelina, no point at all.  Mere gibberish.  And by the way, I am neither a rocket propelled grenade, &quot;rpg character&quot;, nor a convicted felon, &quot;con&quot;.  Then die, stuck pig, die! (Hint here, vague Julius Ceasar reference.  Um, Shakespeare&#039;s Julius, not Orange&#039;s Julius.) I will try to &quot;splain it to you&quot;.  (Note, watch  almost any episode of I Love Lucy for the &#039;splainin&#039; reference.) 

Full allowance for false assumptions.  I presume Mayor Fenty of DC is black.  If not, the allusion collapses, but not entirely. Ha!  I just checked.  He is.  Think about the irony of a black mayor opposing the decision of the Supreme Court based on his own personal wishes and fantasies about firearms.  (That DC believes their definition of a machine gun turns non-machine guns into machine guns.)  Now imgaine asking Mayor Fenty what he thinks about the reasoning of those who opposed the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision.  Isn&#039;t he likely to say, &quot;Hey, the Supreme Court has decided.  That&#039;s it&quot;?  (Yes, yes, yes.  I realize I am assuming his response.  I think it is probable.) So on the one hand he agrees with the Supreme Court&#039;s authority, and on another he does not.  Well, which is it, Mr. Mayor?  I think DC&#039;s reasoning is a specious as any of those southern Jim Crow clingers.  As an aside on the latter, 18 Senator species of Congress critter, and 81 Rep species of Congress critter signed a document, the Southern Manifesto, opposing school integration. Dem-97, Repub-2, in the name of public safety...?  

As silence gives consent, I am please to presume you knew about Promelian Battle Cruisers, Hooked on Phonics and those other obscure document references.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No javelina, no point at all.  Mere gibberish.  And by the way, I am neither a rocket propelled grenade, &#8220;rpg character&#8221;, nor a convicted felon, &#8220;con&#8221;.  Then die, stuck pig, die! (Hint here, vague Julius Ceasar reference.  Um, Shakespeare&#8217;s Julius, not Orange&#8217;s Julius.) I will try to &#8220;splain it to you&#8221;.  (Note, watch  almost any episode of I Love Lucy for the &#8217;splainin&#8217; reference.) </p>
<p>Full allowance for false assumptions.  I presume Mayor Fenty of DC is black.  If not, the allusion collapses, but not entirely. Ha!  I just checked.  He is.  Think about the irony of a black mayor opposing the decision of the Supreme Court based on his own personal wishes and fantasies about firearms.  (That DC believes their definition of a machine gun turns non-machine guns into machine guns.)  Now imgaine asking Mayor Fenty what he thinks about the reasoning of those who opposed the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision.  Isn&#8217;t he likely to say, &#8220;Hey, the Supreme Court has decided.  That&#8217;s it&#8221;?  (Yes, yes, yes.  I realize I am assuming his response.  I think it is probable.) So on the one hand he agrees with the Supreme Court&#8217;s authority, and on another he does not.  Well, which is it, Mr. Mayor?  I think DC&#8217;s reasoning is a specious as any of those southern Jim Crow clingers.  As an aside on the latter, 18 Senator species of Congress critter, and 81 Rep species of Congress critter signed a document, the Southern Manifesto, opposing school integration. Dem-97, Repub-2, in the name of public safety&#8230;?  </p>
<p>As silence gives consent, I am please to presume you knew about Promelian Battle Cruisers, Hooked on Phonics and those other obscure document references.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BobThompson</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-74263</link>
		<dc:creator>BobThompson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 14:12:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-74263</guid>
		<description>I have to go along with TubbyHubby. I reach exactly the opposite conclusion as the writer (which seems to happen often with Post writers). The bad guys, who apparently buy the cheap stuff without regard to the law will continue to do so. The good guys, who merely want to defend themselves against the bad guys, will have the better weapons with which to do that. Hurrah!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to go along with TubbyHubby. I reach exactly the opposite conclusion as the writer (which seems to happen often with Post writers). The bad guys, who apparently buy the cheap stuff without regard to the law will continue to do so. The good guys, who merely want to defend themselves against the bad guys, will have the better weapons with which to do that. Hurrah!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Meaker</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-74106</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Meaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 03:29:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-74106</guid>
		<description>Men between 17 and 45, and those less than 65 with prior military service as an officer or non-commissioned officer are members of the militia. Therefore the military exclusion should apply to this wide class of protected citizens.

The rest of you can decide to be subjects, or criminals.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Men between 17 and 45, and those less than 65 with prior military service as an officer or non-commissioned officer are members of the militia. Therefore the military exclusion should apply to this wide class of protected citizens.</p>
<p>The rest of you can decide to be subjects, or criminals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Meaker</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/comment-page-1/#comment-74103</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Meaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 03:17:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-handgun-restriction-may-be-deadly/#comment-74103</guid>
		<description>The odd thing is that any shotgun can project more than one shot with a single function of the trigger. For example, the common 12 gauge, with 3 inch long &quot;magnum&quot; shells and loaded with number 1 shot, launches 25 each .30 caliber shot with each cartridge. Number 1 shot is the load of choice by erudite police: they penetrate all the way to the back of human targets, giving 25 chances to cut a perpetrator&#039;s spinal chord.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The odd thing is that any shotgun can project more than one shot with a single function of the trigger. For example, the common 12 gauge, with 3 inch long &#8220;magnum&#8221; shells and loaded with number 1 shot, launches 25 each .30 caliber shot with each cartridge. Number 1 shot is the load of choice by erudite police: they penetrate all the way to the back of human targets, giving 25 chances to cut a perpetrator&#8217;s spinal chord.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
