it would be funny if it weren't so tacky.

it reminds me of this.

Josh Sugarman doesn't have a clue!

"revolver that can penetrate the body armor worn by law enforcement."

It's not the revolver, it's the ammunition that is placed in the revolver. If you put the correct ammunition in even some of the weakest caliber pistols, it will penetrate. Just because somebody is published doesn't make them an expert.

"revolver that can penetrate the body armor worn by law enforcement."

Guns don’t penetrate armor; bullets do. Speaking of which we can rename the Wizards Bullets again.

Anyone else ever notice that whenever journalists cover anything that you personally know something about, they always get something wrong?

That makes we wonder what's wrong with all the articles I think are "informative".

I wonder how much the first commemorative S&W used in DC to legally kill an intruder will sell for on eBay?

You know what, smittydc, you make perfect sense. I have noticed that.

Which let me think, JustJenny, we're not making personal attacks, they're criticism of his professionalism. Which is different, and called for especially with journalists. I know if I do a bad job at work, there's hell to pay... Maybe I should just be a weatherman where "accuracy" isn't even an issue...

Zombies... actually I was thinking of this the other day (yes, sad but true) do you think if DC went zombie there'd still be "lyconaut" zombies whipping by? I'd solve their whole speed problem...

Maybe S&W will contribute to legal fees for anyone prosecuted in DC for using their commemorative gun in their DC home.

At least it is a revolver and can be legally registered for home protection use in DC.

The irony is that Mr. Heller will probably be used as the poster boy to challenge the DC "revolvers-only" regulation, which forbids semi-automatic pistols such the Colt Model 1911 Mr. Heller owns.

The DC Government should do all it can to marshal public opinion in favor of the existing "revolver-only" regulation and promoting commemorative firearms might help. I'm favorably impressed by the .45 Long Colt single-action Elvis Western Tribute Revolver.

This revolver is a great deal; it comes with both a commemorative trigger lock and safe. And a really cool plaque that honors Justice Thomas' 17 years of service to Justice Scalia's opinions.

Just think of the amount of ass Mr. Heller is going to get at the GOP convention this year.

You know, it would be pretty cool of the revolver could penetrate armor. It'd probably take someone with really strong forearms to throw a gun hard enough to penetrate the armor. But then he'd have "big guns", eh?

The DC City Council must love wasting money. Beside the revolver only requirement (which I don't understand), the storage requirement goes completely against the Supreme Court opinion. It clearly said DC's trigger lock or disassembled requirement was unconstitutional.

A firearm is useless if you have to unlock it or put it together if needed to protect yourself. It can take several seconds when you are calm. Try doing it quickly when your life is threatened and adrenaline is coursing through your veins. Those seconds are time you do not have when your are being threatened.

This commemorative .38 Smith and Wesson is putting out is nothing unusual. Firearm companies release commemorative models all the time. A .38 revolver is also a common type for home protection because it is easy to fire for almost anyone.

As far the so called "vest busting" firearm Smith and Wesson makes; I want to see any criminal actually carry that thing around. It is 5 pounds, way too heavy to carry. Also, if it is shot without hearing protection, you WILL have hearing damage. That firearm is designed for handgun hunting.

Some of the commenters here obviously do not like the Supreme Court's decision. Fine. Work to change it. Article V of the US Constitution tells you how to amend it.

Keep the armor-piercing gun away from the Morlocks.

Some of the commenters here obviously do not like the Supreme Court's decision. Fine. Work to change it. Article V of the US Constitution tells you how to amend it.

The funny part is that most of the angry comments seem to be from the 2nd Amendment maximalists. If you read the Heller decision, it's not particularly sympathetic to your position. Sure, you get the right to keep a handgun; but the kind of massive regulatory structure that DC is not going away any time. And the SC doesn't seem all that interested in carving out a whole lot more real estate.

I'd be pissed off too if I'd worked my ass off for like 4 decades to have the Court reflect a high-water mark of the Conservative movement, and then they *still* wouldn't just unambivalently knock down these kind of restrictions. Soo close....

Makes me mad even in the hypothetical... ;)

There's a whole armory of commemorative guns that DC residents need:

-The LNS Douche Derringer (with roofie dispenser in grip)
-The Go Back To Yer Own Neighborhood Anti Gentrification Gun (with limited edition soul pick and poopy pants holster)
-The Curb Your Dog Double Barreled Shotgun (with plastic bags and twist ties)
-The Pink Pistols Anti-fag-bashing Machine (in brushed stainless to go with your Viking refrigerator and matching cock ring)
-The You Can't Get a Good NY Slice in This Town revolver (with parmagian grater and a map to Brooklyn)
-The Lycronaut Avenger (with auto tire spike, patch kit, and Pedros recycled milkjug tire change lever)
-The No I Can't Spare Twenty-three Cents Saturday Night Special (with spare change holder)
-The DCist Grammar Nazi Pistol (with red pencil and copy of Strunk & White)
-The Fenty/Lanier-approved Trinidad Defender (a white surrender flag pops out the barrel)

Well, get to it Smith & Wesson, Colt, and Jack's Joke Shop, exit 14 off 295 in South Attleboro, MA.

Remember, if it ain't funny, it ain't worth jack! Hot cha chacha cha!

For all the Constitution haters here, I say stop being hypocrites. Why should you have first amendement rights if others can't have their second amendment rights?

I think you want to take up that issue with the strict constitutionalists on the Court, starting with Scalia. Boy, that guy really turned out to be a disappointment.

There are plenty of us who support all of the rights protected by the Constitution. We just aren't very vocal about it.

And kindof OT.. the best thing the ACLU could ever do, imo, is to revise their 2nd amendment policy in the wake of Heller. Technically, they claim to be neutral on the 2nd amendment, but they never file or join any lawsuits over it. The Nevada ACLU recently did this.

Personally, I'm very happy Smith & Wesson is choosing to give me a hand gun.

As to the opinion of the MPD, every officer I have asked supports the rights of citizens to own firearms. As one officer told me while I waited for hours at the Firearms Registration Section to register a weapon, "we know who the good guys are."

Its only the politically appointed bureaucrats who never patrol on the street -- but nevertheless never leave home without their sidearms -- who spout the Josh Sugarman line against citizens owning firearms.

Hillman, you bring up a good point. If you are not allowed to defend yourself, then the pollice and government should be held responsible in protecting you. You get mugged, they get sued.

Time and time again the courts (including the Supremes) rule that the government has no duty or obligation to protect you. The defense of yourself is up to you. Heller was the first step in making it explicit that government has to allow people the tools to defend themselves.

Anti-gun folks should pick one of two positions:
1. Let people have guns to protect themselves.
or
2. Allow people to sue the police and government for not protecting them.