Good
A lawsuit in the District against gunmakers was dismissed yesterday by a D.C. Superior Court judge who ruled that the suit was precisely the sort of claim that a new federal law was intended to block.
I thought this was ironic:
The D.C. Council, she wrote, had determined that assault weapons have “little or no social benefit but at the same time pernicious consequences for the health and safety of District residents and visitors.” Congress, however, “has trumped local law by passing legislation to protect the profits of such manufacturers,” she wrote.
But guns are illegal in DC. How can they have pernicious consequences for the health and safety of District residents and visitors?
May 24th, 2006 at 11:19 pm
The DC Council has only as much ‘local rule’ as Congress chooses to give them. If they don’t like it, they can get 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the state legislatures to change that.