!@#@#%^%%^$!!!!!!
I AM SICK OF WELL MEANING BUT IGNORANT PRO-GUN ACTIVISTS USING THIS FALSE ARGUEMENT. PLEASE STOP.
Mohammed and Malvo committed precisely one murder in the District of Columbia. That murder was committed very close to the Maryland border; they may well have thought they were in Maryland. They may also have not cared. In either case, the Washington DC gun ban was completely irrelevant.
They committed approximately 60% of their murders in Maryland, a state with obnoxious gun laws. However, New York, New Jersey, Massachussetts, Illinois, and California (for a start) have far worse laws. Firearms are not virtually prohibited in Maryland.
Virginia, the site of the rest of Mohammad and Malvo's murders, has: No list of "banned" guns, shall issue concealed carry, and a regularly executed death penalty.
If Mohammad and Malvo were seeking an area with severe gun control laws, they would have committed their murders in Washington DC, or New York, or Boston, or Chicago, or Los Angeles; someplace other than Virginia or even Maryland.
I live in Fairfax County, VA. I frequently travel to Montgomery County, MD. I am very familiar with the gun laws in this area; I have to try to comply with them.
Please, try to keep your facts straight.
Thank you.
-Bustard
A tad touchy today aren't we?
The fact that they were called the "Washington DC" snipers led to my comments about the gun laws. I'm sure that the local gun laws had nothing to do with the choice of the area to commit the crimes as these two had no regard for any laws.