You read that right. Courtland Milloy, a Washington Post columnist, is touting the efficacy of allowing concealed carry in the District. This after a man who was walking his dog was attacked and killed by a knife-wielding neighbor. We know that the ‘we’re winning’ articles and posts can get pretty repetitive and tired but you know what? We’re winning . . .
Milloy does a nice job of tying in the recent Maryland court ruling, too:
Whether or not this story proves to be as insane as it sounds, the incident as reported does provide a textbook case for legalizing handguns in the District, as well as buttress a ruling Monday by a federal judge that declared significant parts of Maryland’s gun-control law unconstitutional.
To get a permit to carry a gun in Maryland, residents must prove that they have “good and substantial reason” to do so. Hogwash, says the judge. He might have noted that someone like Wright would never have been able to prove that he needed a gun to walk his dog — until Sunday, that is. By then, of course, it would have been too late.
The columnist also chronicles the fact that in D.C., knives outnumber guns as weapons of choice when committing an assault. Milloy also takes not of something called “assault knives” – whatever those are – that local kwikky marts sell for a little as ten bones. But let’s not quibble, shall we?
To be clear, that’s a long-time local columnist at a big, liberal establishment dead tree newspaper telling his readers in a Dem-contolled town it’s time to ease the restrictions and let people carry guns. That kind of heresy makes Martin Luther look like a piker.
This comes as the D.C. City Council voted (the mayor has promised to sign the new law) to unravel part of its crazy-quilt of obstacles thrown up in the way of Washingtonians who want to pack heat. Sure, they only did it because after the Heller decision Congress probably would have done it for them, but again, this is a quibble-free zone. Today anyway.
So to answer RF’s question in a word, yes.