How Can It Be?

[Michael Rossi]

How can it be that a man with a GUN walked into the Holocaust museum in Washington D.C. and started shooting, when Washington D.C. has a gun ban? Did someone forget to tell this guy that guns were banned in the city? How can it be that Washington D.C. has one of the highest murder rates in the country when they have a gun ban? Puzzling, isn't it?

In 2007, Washington D.C. had a murder rate of 31 murders per 100,000 population, while Columbus Ohio, where law abiding citizens are not only allowed to own guns, but are allowed to carry them (either openly or concealed), has a murder rate of only 11 murders per 100,000 population! How can that be?

Mike

[J Scott]

Originally posted by MikeOH:

How can it be that a man actually carried a gun into Washington D.C. when that is illegal? I thought tough gun control laws prevented that?

Sorry, Mike, I gave you too much credit...

Let me explain:

We have things called "laws." Laws are created by the legislative branch of the government. They are intended to provide a framework for defining what is and is not acceptable in society within particular borders (for example, the DC legislature creates laws that are applicable to DC).

It is not the legislative branch of the government's job to enforce these laws. In other words, this branch of the government makes the laws, but they rely on another branch of the government to enforce the laws.

Specifically, it's the executive branch of the government that is tasked with carrying out the enforcement of laws that the legislative branch creates.

Now, keep in mind that the members of the executive branch are human, and therefore fallible. While they try to ensure that the laws are enforced wholly and substantially, including deterring those who might feel inclined to break the law, sometimes that enforcement occurs after a law has been broken.

In these cases, it is the executive branches' job to apprehend the person they believe has broken the law, and to hand that person over to the judicial branch of the government, which is responsible for determining if the person actually broke the law and then for doling out punishment.

So, as you can see, our system of government is designed to create (legislative branch) and enforce (executive branch) laws, but is not designed to ensure that these laws are never broken. If it were, there would be need for this third branch of the government -- the judicial branch.

I guess I had assumed you knew that (most of us do), which is why I provided a more complex answer above. Didn't realize we were stuck on the basics.

Let me know if I can answer any more questions, Mike! And don't worry, while I know it can be complicated ("complicated" means "hard"), I'm sure you'll figure it out!