In Washington, District of Criminals, you'd feel lucky to be able to get a license to have a gun in your house. Especially one that you could actually use for self defense.
"No handgun can be legally possessed in the District unless it is registered. All handguns registered in the District prior to Sept. 24, 1976, were required to have been reregistered by Feb. 5, 1977. After that date, no more handguns could be registered .
Thus, it is unlawful to possess, acquire, or bring into D.C. any handgun which was not registered as of Feb. 5, 1977."
That's for handguns, the requirements for having a long guns are only slightly less onorous, and still make you want to puke.
"Carrying a handgun in the District is prohibited. All firearms are to be kept at one's home or place of business.
All firearms must be unloaded and disassembled or locked with a trigger lock except when kept at a registrant's place of business or while being used for lawful "recreational" purposes. A D.C. license to carry a pistol is needed for one's home or business and the pistol must also have been registered prior to September 24, 1976.
Self-defense in one's home with a firearm is therefore legally precluded."
If you ate something that didn't aggree with you and need to purge, see NRA-ILA synsopis of D.C. Firearms Laws, from which the quotes above were taken. As you can see the Second Amendment doesn't apply in the nation's capitial. One wonders how much of the rest of the Constitution doesn't apply there. (Other than by its own terms that is)
I thought I read that some people have managed to shoot attackers using quickly-assembled break-barrel shotguns. I believe in at least some cases they even got away with it, if they were able to argue that they did not assemble the firearms until they had reason to believe that their life was in deadly peril.