Straight Platform Politics

District Of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemic – Part 9

Behavioral Surveillance: Participants

The District’s HIV/AIDS Behavioral Surveillance (HBS) Summary Report 2008 was released in March. This HBS concentrated on heterosexuals at risk of HIV infection (HBS-HET).

The targeted population for this HBS-HET was males and females 18 years and over who had sexual intercourse with a member of the opposite sex in the past 12 months and had some connection to a geographical high risk area (HRA). The HRAs were those with the highest poverty rates and the highest AIDS rates. There were 4 such HRAs: one was located in Ward 7, one was in Ward 8, one was located on the border between Wards 5 and 6, and one included parts of Wards 1, 2, 5, and 6. See Part 4

Participants filled out a survey and were offered free anonymous rapid HIV tests. The participants were given risk reduction materials, free condoms, and service referrals as needed. Participants also received monetary rewards for participating.

The majority of participants: was over 30 years old (61.4%), was black (92.3%), had never been married (61.6%), had a high school degree or less (85.7%), had an annual household income of less than $9,999 (60%), and, if insured, was insured through Medicaid or Medicare (91.8%).

District of Columbia, HBS, HBS-HET, HIV care, HIV epidemic, HIV infection rates, HIV mode of transmission, HIV testing, HIV/AIDS, HIV/AIDS epidemic, HIV/AIDS intervention strategy, HIV/AIDS percentages, HIV/AIDS prevention strategy, The District of Columbia, Washington D.C., females at risk, free condoms, heterosexual contact, heterosexual contact transmission, heterosexuals, high risk areas, mode of transmission, risk behavior, risk behaviors, risk factors, risky behavior, risky sexual behavior

District Of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemic – Part 8

Behavioral Surveillance: Background

The District of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemiology Update 2008 was released in March of this year. The District’s HIV/AIDS Behavioral Surveillance (HBS) Summary Report 2008 was also released in March. This behavioral surveillance studied what people are doing and what risks they are taking before they are infected. Understanding risk behaviors is an important step in reducing the problem of the HIV disease in the District.

This HBS concentrated on heterosexuals at risk of HIV infection (HBS-HET). It was a partnership between DC’s Department of Health and George Washington University’s School of Public Health and Health Services. Unfortunately, the Report reinforced the Update’s bleak statistics and disheartening conclusions. (See previous posts on the HIV/AIDS epidemic in DC.)

The District has the highest HIV/AIDS case rate in the United States and this rate is considered to be of epidemic proportion. Unfortunately, heterosexual contact leads new transmissions: about 37% of newly reported infections are through heterosexual contact. The data imply that a generalized epidemic among heterosexuals at high risk for HIV may be emerging in the District.

District of Columbia, George Washington University’s School of Public Health, HIV care, HIV epidemic, HIV infection rates, HIV mode of transmission, HIV/AIDS, HIV/AIDS epidemic, HIV/AIDS rates, HIV/AIDS statistics, The District of Columbia, Washington D.C., behavioral surveillance, females at risk, heterosexual contact, heterosexual contact transmission, mode of transmission, risk behavior, risk behaviors, risk factors, risky sexual behavior, unprotected sex

District Of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemic – Part 6

The Statistics by Race

The District of Columbia’s HIV/AIDS 2008 Update was released in March and includes many staggering facts and conclusions on the District’s current epidemic.

The Update reports the District’s total population by race as being 52.9% Black, 34.2% White, 8.0% Hispanic, and 4.9% other. These are adults and adolescents over the age of 13 (A/A). The percentages of A/A living with HIV/AIDS by race are: 4.3% Black, 1.9% Hispanic, 1.5% other, and 1.4% White.

There are 15,120 A/A living with HIV/AIDS. The percentages of this group by race are: 76.3% Black, 16.0% White, 5.2% Hispanic, and 2.5% other. Blacks comprise a little over half of the total A/A population of the District, but comprise ¾ of the A/A population living with HIV/AIDS.

The mode of transmission of HIV differs by race. Men-having-sex-with-men (MSM) is the greatest mode for white males: 82.4%. The greatest modes for black males are: 42.1% MSM, 20.0% heterosexual contact, and 19.7% injection drug user (IDU). Greatest modes for Hispanic males are: 59.3% MSM and 19.7% heterosexual contact.

Heterosexual contact is the greatest mode for females: Hispanic 70.1%, Black 58.1%, and 51.1% White.

Blacks, District of Columbia, HIV by race, HIV epidemic, HIV infection rates, HIV mode of transmission, HIV/AIDS, HIV/AIDS epidemic, HIV/AIDS rate 1%, HIV/AIDS rate 3%, Hispanics, IDU, MSM, The District of Columbia, Washington D.C., Whites, epidemic, females at risk, heterosexual contact, heterosexual contact transmission, homosexuals, injection drug user, men having sex with men, mode of transmission, non-homosexual men, risky behavior, risky sexual behavior, unprotected sex

District Of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemic – Part 5

The Statistics by Gender

The District of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemiology Update 2008 verifies that the District is in the midst of a “modern HIV/AIDS epidemic.” See Part 1

The Update reports that the District’s total population of adults and adolescents over the age of 13 (A/A) is 506,722. There are 15,120 A/A living with HIV/AIDS, which is 3% of the total A/A population. See Part 3

The gender percentages of the total A/A population are 46.6% male and 53.4% female. However, even though there are fewer males, they have an HIV/AIDS infection rate almost 3 times higher than females: 4.6% to 1.6%.

The male-to-female comparison within the 15,120 population is startling: 71.7% male to 28.3% female. This reflects Update results showing that men-having-sex-with-men is the leading mode of disease transmission. This includes not only homosexuals but also non-homosexual men engaging in risky sexual behavior.

Unfortunately, data also show that heterosexual contact as a mode of disease transmission is increasing. This puts the female population of the District at great risk. Sadly, many of them may already be infected and not even know it.

District of Columbia, HIV care, HIV cases by gender, HIV epidemic, HIV infection rates, HIV mode of transmission, HIV/AIDS, HIV/AIDS epidemic, HIV/AIDS rate 1%, HIV/AIDS rate 3%, HIV/AIDS rates, HIV/AIDS statistics, MSM, The District of Columbia, Update 2008, Washington D.C., epidemic, females at risk, heterosexual contact, heterosexual contact transmission, homosexuals, men having sex with men, mode of transmission, non-homosexual men, risky behavior, risky sexual behavior, unprotected sex

District Of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemic – Part 4

The Statistics by Neighborhood

The District’s HIV/AIDS Update See Part 1 also sorted the data by neighborhood wards. Among all residents of the District that are adults and adolescents over the age of 13 (A/A), the rates of those living with HIV/AIDS show that the epidemic is widespread.

UNAIDS and CDC define an HIV epidemic as generalized and severe when the overall percentage exceeds 1%. See Part 3 There are eight District wards and seven have rates ranging from 1.7-2.8%.

Ward 3 has the lowest number of HIV/AIDS cases (267) and the lowest rate of infection (0.3%) and the least number of publicly funded HIV/AIDS service providers (2).

There are two noteworthy observations about the District made in the 2008 Update. One is that persons engaging in any type of unprotected sex are at risk for becoming infected. The other is that, in recent years, trends in new AIDS cases and trends in new HIV (not AIDS) cases suggest that heterosexual contact is slowly emerging as the leading mode of transmission.

CDC, District of Columbia, HIV care, HIV medication, HIV mode of transmission, HIV testing, HIV/AIDS, HIV/AIDS epidemic, HIV/AIDS intervention strategy, HIV/AIDS prevention strategy, HIV/AIDS rate 1%, HIV/AIDS rate 3%, HIV/AIDS rates, HIV/AIDS statistics, The District of Columbia, UNAIDS, Update 2008, Washington D.C., epidemic, free condoms, heterosexual contact, heterosexual contact transmission, needle exchange, promote-prevent-protect, unprotected sex

District Of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemic – Part 3

The Statistics by Age

The District’s HIV/AIDS Update See Part 1 See Part 2 includes 16 tables, 37 figures, 4 maps, and a huge amount of discouraging data.

The United Nations Joint Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) define an HIV epidemic as generalized and severe when the overall percentage exceeds 1%. In the District 3% of the population 13 years old and older are living with HIV/AIDS.

Among all residents that are adults and adolescents over the age of 13 (A/A), the age range most impacted is the 40-49 year olds with 7.2% of that age range living with HIV/AIDS. The 50-59 year olds are next with 5.2% and the 30-39 year olds with 3.4%. The District’s 13-19 year olds are the only age group under the 1% threshold; it is 0.1%.

Of the 15,120 A/A living with HIV/AIDS, 37.9% are 40-49 years old, 24.5% are 50-59, and 21.1% are 30-39. The 20-29 year olds and the over 60 group are each 8.1%. The 13-19 year olds are 0.4%.

Unfortunately, even if the District curtails the number of new cases of infection, the number of adults living with HIV/AIDS will remain high for years to come.

CDC, HIV care, HIV medication, HIV testing, HIV/AIDS, HIV/AIDS epidemic, HIV/AIDS intervention strategy, HIV/AIDS prevention strategy, HIV/AIDS rate 1%, HIV/AIDS rate 3%, HIV/AIDS rates, HIV/AIDS statistics, The District of Columbia, UNAIDS, United Nations, Update 2008, Washington D.C., epidemic, needle exchange, promote-prevent-protect

Second Amendment Rights: U.S. Supreme Court Decides Gun Control Laws Unconstitutional-Part 11

The Heller Journey: The oral arguments continued

During the Heller arguments, humorous comments from some of the justices elicited laughter. One such incident occurred during discussion of trigger locks. The District’s regulation that prohibited a functional firearm in the home was challenged as being unconstitutional. The regulation required that firearms had to be unloaded and disassembled or trigger locked. See Part 5

During the rebuttal argument of Walter Dellinger for the District of Columbia, Chief Justice Roberts wanted to know how long it took to remove a trigger lock, which was one step in making the firearm functional. The following exchange took place:

“Mr. Dellinger: You – you place a trigger lock on and it has – the version I have, a few – you can buy them at 17^th Street Hardware – has a code, like a three-digit code. You turn to the code and you pull it apart. That’s all it takes. Even – it took me three seconds.

Justice Scalia: You turn on – you turn on the lamp next to your bed so you can – you turn the knob at 3-22-95, and somebody –

Mr. Dellinger: Well –

Chief Justice Roberts: Is it like that? Is it a numerical code?

Mr. Dellinger: Yes, you can have one with a numerical code.

Chief Justice Roberts: So then you turn on the lamp, you pick up your reading glasses –

[Laughter.]”

Chief Justice Roberts asked again about the time factor and Mr. Dellinger responded that it took him three seconds. “I’m not kidding. It’s – it’s not that difficult to do it. That was in daylight.”

The Court’s opinion was decided on June 26, 2008 and was written by Justice Scalia. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the judgment of the Court of Appeals that had ruled that the challenged regulations were unconstitutional.

Alan Gura, Chief Justice, Court case hearing, Dick Heller, Gun Control, Gun Control Laws, Justice Scalia, Justices, Second Amendment Rights, The District of Columbia, The Heller Case, U.S. Court of Appeals, U.S. Supreme Court, Walter Dellinger, firearms, oral arguments, trigger locks

Second Amendment Rights: U.S. Supreme Court Decides Gun Control Laws Unconstitutional–Part 10

The U.S. Supreme Court in June 2008 decided District of Columbia v. Heller, a case dealing with the constitutionality of certain gun control provisions in Washington DC’s code of law. The high court confirmed that the Second Amendment did indeed recognize that individuals had a right to own, carry, and use firearms for private use.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Heller Journey: The oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court

District of Columbia, et al., v. Dick Anthony Heller came before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 18, 2008. Oral arguments began at 10:06 a.m. and ended at 11:43 a.m. at which time the case was considered ‘submitted’ to the court.

Each attorney was given a time limit and had to give his main arguments and make his important points within that timeframe. When the red light went on indicating that Alan Gura’s time was up, he stopped in mid-sentence. See Part 9

However, throughout the oral arguments, the justices were interrupting the attorneys by asking questions, making comments, redirecting the flow of thought, or confirming something that the attorney had said. In this case the chief justice and seven of the justices participated. Justice Thomas, as usual, only listened.

In the midst of the interruptions, the attorneys tried to get back to their main arguments and important points. If an attorney felt that the justices were straying too far from the attorney’s main point or argument, the attorney tried to refocus the discussion.

On rare occasions the justices also interrupted each other or finished each other’s sentences. They would also make opposing comments to a colleague’s observation or point of view.

Alan Gura, Chief Justice, Court case hearing, Dick Heller, Gun Control, Gun Control Laws, Justices, Second Amendment Rights, The District of Columbia, The Heller Case, The Parker Case, U.S. Court of Appeals, U.S. District Court, U.S. Supreme Court, oral arguments

Second Amendment Rights: U.S. Supreme Court Decides Gun Control Laws Unconstitutional-Part 9

The Heller Case: The legal team continued

The Heller court case, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2008, began as Parker v. District of Columbia in 2003 . Robert A. Levy, Clark Neily, and Alan Gura comprised the case’s legal team. See Part 8

Clark Neily and Robert Levy decided to challenge the District of Columbia’s gun control regulations. Since the two men did not want the case to be seen as a radical gun issue sponsored by gun rights organizations, Levy personally financed the case. He wanted the legal team to make decisions free from the pressure of other financial backers.

The two men chose six people who were willing to bring complaints against the District’s gun ban. Levy and Neily then chose the person who would represent the six plaintiffs and who would be the case’s lead attorney: Alan Gura.

Levy was socially acquainted with Gura; they shared a similar ideology of individual liberties and the importance of constitutional rights. Gura earned a law degree in 1995 and was only 37 years old with about 13 years legal experience when he made his first appearance before the U.S. Supreme Court defending Heller in 2008.

When the case was gaining attention and historical significance, Levy was encouraged by several people to replace Gura with a seasoned veteran who could stand against the legal prowess and substantial legal experience of the 66 year old lead attorney hired by the District of Columbia. Levy stayed with Gura who had already spent 5 years on the case and who knew it like no one else could.

The legal team knew the strategy they wanted to follow and it was carefully executed by Alan Gura. The team had decided that the focus of the case was to be the handgun ban and the functional firearm ban in the District’s gun control regulations. The strategy was to keep the case focused and narrow. Gura adhered to that and it proved to be a winning strategy.

Alan Gura, Clark Neily, Court Case Strategy, Dick Heller, Gun Control, Gun Control Laws, Legal Team, Robert Levy, Second Amendment Rights, Shelley Parker, The District of Columbia, The Heller Case, The Parker Case, U.S. Court of Appeals, U.S. District Court, U.S. Supreme Court

Second Amendment Rights: U.S. Supreme Court Decides Gun Control Laws Unconstitutional-Part 8

The Heller Case: The legal team

The Heller court case, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2008, began as Parker v. District of Columbia in 2003 . Robert A. Levy, Clark Neily, and Alan Gura comprised the case’s legal team.

The challenge to the District’s gun ban was carefully planned by Robert Levy and Clark Neily. Levy is chairman of the Cato Institute whose public policies are based on the principles of limited government, free markets, individual liberty, and peace.

Mr. Levy was born, raised, and schooled in the District. He became a successful businessman and retired young. He then entered law school and received a law degree in 1994 when he was 53 years old.

Clark Neily is a senior attorney with the Institute for Justice, a civil liberties law firm founded in 1991. IJ calls itself the only libertarian public interest law firm in the nation. Neily earned his law degree in Texas and joined IJ in 2000. He met Robert Levy when they were both law clerks for U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth.

Many years later Neily spoke to his former fellow law clerk about the idea of challenging the  District of Columbia’s gun ban. They decided to do it and began interviewing prospective plaintiffs in 2002; they wanted gender, racial, age, and income diversity. They also wanted respectable, law-abiding citizens.

The two men chose six District residents to be the plaintiffs in Parker v. District of Columbia: three men and three women, four white and two black, ranging in age from mid 20s to early 60s, having different incomes and different occupa-tions. The first plaintiff listed was Shelley Parker so the case was known as Parker. See Part 6 See Part 7

Even though Robert Levy had never owned a gun, he was willing to be an integral part of a historical gun ban challenge.

Alan Gura, Clark Neily, Court Case Strategy, Gun Control, Gun Control Laws, Robert Levy, Second Amendment Rights, Shelley Parker, The District of Columbia, The Heller Case, The Parker Case, U.S. Court of Appeals, U.S. District Court, U.S. Supreme Court