Gun Ban

2008-06-30
By Brian Gilmore

When James Swann, the “crazy Shotgun Stalker” roamed the streets of Washington D.C. back in 1993 shooting innocent citizens at random, mostly in the black community, everyone I know got armed. People pulled out their grandfather’s old pistols, some people bought guns on the black market, still others simply began carrying guns they had illegally owned for years at all times. At the height of the crisis, everyone, except me it seemed, had a handgun in their pocket if they were out in the city.

The Supreme Court just codified this conduct with its decision yesterday to uphold the right to bear arms for self-defense. Yet you know and I know the decision by the Court is meaningless. It had nothing to do with Black America

If the decision had gone the other way, handgun shootings in America would have gone on at the record rate it has always gone on ever since we kept track of such numbers. Black men already carry guns (illegally) for self defense and regularly exercise that right.

But ultimately, the decision, to overturn D.C.’s strict handgun ban, simply told us what we all already knew: gun toting in America is like bullfighting in Spain: it is imbedded in our culture. It is not something we are prepared to give up either.

But the decision by the Court did not, and it wasn’t designed to, resolve the core issue that the case brings to light: how do we curb the handgun violence rampant in our communities? That was the reason D.C. passed the gun ban 32 years ago and why many other cities and municipalities pass gun laws. 

The history of the city sheds some light on the D.C. gun ban and why it is a useless piece of legislation. It was passed back in the 1970’s when heroin ruled the streets of Washington D.C.  Handgun violence was rampant. The city had just achieved partial home rule and acted to address the flow of guns on the streets. The riots of 1968 were still fresh in the minds of lawmakers.
The violence in D.C. ebbed and flowed over the years and in the 1990’s, when crack arrived in the city, the city became, for a few years, the most violent city in America. Those who never once cared about the law were laughing. They had their guns, and they were ready to use them at the drop of a hat.

One school of thought regarding handgun violence says let everyone get armed and this will act as a deterrent. If they think you are packing, they will not try you. Another school of thought says work towards gun control like Japan did years ago: no guns for the most part whatsoever for anyone. The logic is, if a society collectively commits to banning guns, violence will decrease.

Neither of these approaches appears to be the ticket for pockets of Black America. Our commitment to violence is complex. If guns were effectively banned, we probably would resort to knives or something else. There is no mystery: we know why Black men shoot other black men with handguns for the most part every day of the week in America: circumstances.

These circumstances are drugs, poverty, poor schools, lack of job training and opportunities, low self-esteem, racism, the easy availability of handguns, and in many cases, a culture of lawlessness and decadent behavior. Two or three of these factors work in concert and next thing you know, you have a dead black man shot by another black man with a handgun.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 60 percent of black homicides were gun related in 2005. In addition, BJS reported that “from 2001 to 2005, more than nine out of 10 black murder victims were killed by other blacks, and three out of four were slain with a gun.” No Supreme Court decision can fix this. We are also passing the point where massive government intervention will carry the day (though the government has a role to play).

Truth is, some parts of Black America might be lost. The “technological revolution” train left the station without them. The industrial age that their forebears inherited and used well is over. This leaves many Black men and women trapped in parts of America with only a few choices.

The first is a low paying, degrading menial job. The second choice is criminal conduct and prison. The third choice is to somehow overcome the incredible obstacles placed in your way and escape the madness and not get shot along the way. The Supreme Court cannot save you.

Thus, I do not make much of the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday. I expected it. If there is a right to bear arms for self defense purposes now according to the Court, it only means that perhaps fewer black men will go to jail for petty gun charges.

But the Court also told Black America what it has known for years: stopping handgun violence in our communities will mostly be accomplished from within the community.

Brian Gilmore is an attorney and a writer based in Washington, D.C.