As we mentioned this morning, today the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is holding a hearing to discuss legislation that would do away with the District’s newly-issued regulations on gun ownership. According to the pro-gun crowd, the city’s regulations are still restrictive enough to violate the Supreme Court’s June decision holding the District’s handgun ban to be unconstitutional.

Of course, Congress stepping up to re-write local gun laws isn’t anything new; the twist is that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi recently said she would allow the legislation to come to a vote in order to save vulnerable Blue Dog Democrats from negative NRA publicity coming into November’s elections.

Two local officials are stepping up to preempt Congress, though. In time for today’s hearing, D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton introduced legislation that would call for the District merely to comply with the Supreme Court’s decision. At the same time, Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large) sent a memo to D.C. Council Chair Vincent Gray announcing his intention to submit legislation on September 16 that would amend the current regulations. His amendments would address the main complaints expressed by Congress by allowing the registration of semi-automatic pistols; making current storage requirements advisory and instead imposing penalties for child access to guns; replacing ballistics testing with a requirement that new firearms be micro-stamped; and repealing the limitation on the amount of guns that each resident can register (currently one). Mendelson announced that he would hold two hearings on the amendments, on September 18 and October 1.

Of course, both efforts may be too little too late. If Pelosi really sees the congressional legislation as the only way to save a few members of her party, then we wouldn’t be surprised to see the House vote before the end of the month. And while such a move is a clear affront to home rule and Pelosi should be told so, we all know that the Senate is the place where attempts like these go to die.

That’s not to say that the Council shouldn’t act on Mendelson’s amendments — the man isn’t known for his radical views on gun ownership, and his amendments are common-sense responses to many of the complaints that have been echoed so far. It would behoove the District to get a solid set of acceptable regulations in place, because we all know what the next battle down the line is — zoning.