One Year After Heller, Not Much Has Changed

Posted by Tom in DC Life on 06 26th, 2009 | no responses

Photo by Samer Farha It was on this day last year that the District’s longstanding and long controversial ban on handguns was upended , when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that such blanket prohibitions were an unconstitutional infringement of the Second Amendment. More broadly, though, what had been the country’s strictest regulations of a specific type of gun gave the majority of the court the chance to rule that the Second Amendment granted an individual, not collective right to gun ownership. And it was all because of a District resident whose name now graces the case file: Dick Heller. If the decision was monumental and momentous, the year in between has been anything but. While city officials originally warned that any such ruling would provoke a sudden surge in gun violence, they quickly came to terms with the legal reality and began what has been a slow and somewhat obtuse process of crafting regulations that allow District residents to own handguns — after jumping through a number of hoops , of course. In the meantime, Heller and other residents have filed additional lawsuits against the District, arguing that city officials have continued to flout the spirit of the ruling by throwing obstacles between guns and their hopeful owners. Gun registrations haven’t exactly overwhelmed the police, indicating that either District residents aren’t too keen on owning guns, or are stymied by the registration process and lack of local gun-shopping options. (The zoning debate process over where potential gun shops could go took place earlier this year .) The bigger fight has remained on Capitol Hill, where Republicans and conservative Democrats continued an annual tradition of trying to gut the city’s gun laws. But this time, the effort — led by Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) — was attached to legislation that would grant the District a voting seat in the House, effectively sinking the measure earlier this month. Voting rights activists and their allies on the Hill have expressed frustration that even with a fully Democratic Congress and Democratic White House, they still haven’t been able to move forward on enfranchising District residents. Gun proponents have countered by arguing that the move is only a means to make the city comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling. So what comes next? The District recently expanded the number of guns residents

could own, a measure meant to prevent another lawsuit. This move, coming nearly a year after the Heller ruling, exemplifies how city officials have awkwardly and haltingly moved to craft rules and regulations that comply with the court’s decision. In their defense, the court’s dictate left the issue of what regulations are permissible for another day, leaving the District with little exact guidance on how far their limitations on gun ownership could go. The city government has obviously not embraced Heller with open arms, instead attempting to do just enough to allow residents to own guns, but not enough to actually make owning a gun easy. That’s governance in a nutshell, isn’t it? In the end, Heller was a symbolic victory that may not have many practical impacts. Will gun violence in the District rise as a consequence? Even if gun murders sky-rocket, linking them to legal handgun ownership is always an iffy proposition. And if violence goes down — as homicides have this year — arguing that more guns makes for a safer populace is similarly difficult. Being able to own a handgun in the District may not end up being worth more than the piece of mind for those who feel safer for having them in their homes. Of course, seeing a gun shop on your local corner might be something of a shock, but we’re still a few years away from that. One year later, the Heller ruling has become more about home rule than it has about guns. The city’s elected officials argue that crafting gun regulations is their business, and they have the right to impose registration requirements, training mandates and other restrictions. But opponents point out that no matter what the District thinks, it’s still under the control of Congress, and if a member wants to make a point about the Second Amendment by gutting the city’s gun laws, they will. Both are right, unfortunately. The best we can hope for is that the usual suspects on the Hill come to accept that the District has moved towards complying with the Heller ruling, and maybe next time legislation regarding the District comes up, it won’t again be sunk by the weight of the handgun issue.