Republican Mayoral candidate Dennis Moore Supports DC Gun Control-- Strongly

The Washington Post blog "D.C. Wire" featured Republican mayoral candidate Dennis Moore recently. In the comment section, a resident named NE DC wrote: "I would only vote republican if Mr. Moore would fight to get the gunban lifted." Dennis Moore's response:

Sorry "NE DC" -- Being ex-military, a clear thinking person, and an eyewitness to the actual horrors of random urban gun violence hereand across the globe, I am acutely aware of the purpose and problems of personal gun ownership. Lifting or diluting the gun ban will not be a policy I will ever support.

Simply, guns are for killing people, and the violent gene in human nature leads to people using guns to kill people. This simple point becomes absolutely clear if (God forbid) you or someone dear to you becomes a victim of random (or premeditated) gun violence.In an urban capital city-state, only police and licensed security personnel should carry guns while we aggressively prevent, catch, prosecute
and swiftly punish those who use guns (and other weapons) to threaten, rob, rape, hurt or kill the rest of us.

Nevertheless, I hope you can broaden your perspective and sensitivity to consider the greater good for you, your family and the general public safety of all District of Columbia citizens. If I get your support and vote in that process, then we are both winners.

Although Moore correctly states that "guns are for killing people," they kill bad people, not just good people. Guns in the right hands save lives. And, police, being human, must also possess "the violent gene in human nature leads to people using guns to kill people."

One can access the crime rates in the District from 1960 - 2000 here. From 1960 - 1963, murders were under 100 per year in the District. From 1967 - 1975, murders were in the range of 221 to 287 per year. D.C. passed its draconian gun ban in 1976. During the rest of the 1970s and early 1980s, the rate hovered around 200 per year, even dipping down to 147 in 1985. Gun control appeared that it might work, somewhat.

Then, beginning in 1988 through 1996, the murder rate exploded, averaging 423 murders every year. Compare that to 235, the number the year before the gun ban was enacted. Today, the murder rate is slightly under 200 per year, which is more than the average per year during the first few years after the gun ban.

What should we conclude? Draconian gun control measures usually do not keep guns out of the hands of criminals, and are of only marginal utility. Gun bans may have nothing to do with whether the murder rate rises or declines. D.C. officials credit the gun ban with reducing the murder rate when it falls, but do not credit the gun ban as a contributing factor to the bloody 1990s. Meanwhile, the civil liberties of would-be law abiding gun owners have been trampled with only a marginal benefit to public safety, if any.

Finally, consider this: the voter who incited Moore's comment was an independent or Democrat. He/she said: "I would only vote republican if Mr. Moore would fight to get the gunban lifted." The assumption that D.C. voters are unequivocally anti-gun should be open to review. People are tired of crime, and the gun ban has not produced conclusive results after 30 years.