Thundar
Regular Member
imported post
In its petition to the Supreme Court the District of Columbia made the absurd argument that banning handguns was o.k. because the people could still have shotguns and rifles.
The D.C. ban defines handgun as a firearm that can be operated with one hand. My grandfather lost an arm in WWII. So the D.C gun ban would disarm him because he lost an arm in defense of his country???
Many disabled veterans and stroke patients only have use of one arm. Why should this handicap remove their ability to defend themselves?
Shame on the D.C. Council. DisabledVets deserve better.
In its petition to the Supreme Court the District of Columbia made the absurd argument that banning handguns was o.k. because the people could still have shotguns and rifles.
The D.C. ban defines handgun as a firearm that can be operated with one hand. My grandfather lost an arm in WWII. So the D.C gun ban would disarm him because he lost an arm in defense of his country???
Many disabled veterans and stroke patients only have use of one arm. Why should this handicap remove their ability to defend themselves?
Shame on the D.C. Council. DisabledVets deserve better.