Since enacting its gun ban, D.C. has ranked at or near the top of the list of most violent cities in America—often earning the distinction of being the nation's murder capital.  Nonetheless, supporters of the law are now mounting a full PR offensive claiming that, without this constitutionally offensive statute, things would have been much worse!  Reasonable people realize that the first rule of getting yourself out of a hole is to stop digging.  Such rationale, however, is lost on the gun grabbers who think that if a gun control law has failed in its stated purpose (in this case reducing violent crime), the best thing that can be done is to maintain (or often expand) the law.

Here's just a sampling of some of the positions taken by advocates for keeping the ban in place:

"…I don't see it (allowing lawful gun ownership in the home for self-protection) being a big increase in safety for the homeowner."—D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier

"The handgun ban has saved many lives and will continue to do so if it remains in effect." —D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty

"This is not a law which takes away the right to keep and bear arms."—Walter E. Dellinger III, former acting solicitor general

"The [ruling to overturn the D.C. gun ban] would certainly increase gun death and injury among District residents.  [The ban] has long protected DC's residents…[and] provides compelling evidence of how strict gun laws save lives by keeping handguns out of homes." —Violence Policy Center

The 30-year-old D.C. experiment has failed.  The D.C. gun ban doesn't make its citizens safer.  It does not prevent criminals from getting guns.  And it violates the U.S. Constitution.

Stay tuned for future developments on this story.