Bill Clinton's ban on semi-automatic
firearms--guns that an anti-gun Congress re-defined as "assault
weapons" in the 1994 crime bill--will expire Sept. 13, 2004. A
drumbeat has begun in the national media to "reauthorize" the ban,
and anti-gun legislators are dancing to that familiar
beat.
In the House, H.R. 2038 has been introduced by
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.). Instead of a "reauthorization" of the
Clinton ban, McCarthy wants to ban millions of more guns and begin a
backdoor national registration scheme.
Make Your Voice
Heard
NRA Members are urged
to contact their Senators and Congressman and ask them to
oppose any effort to keep alive the Clinton gun ban. The
U.S. Capitol switchboard is (202) 225-3121. You can also
use the "Write
Your
Representatives"
tool.
|
All told, H.R. 2038 is a giant step closer to the
goal stated by Clinton ban sponsor Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.),
on CBS' "60 Minutes"-- "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate
of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of
them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done
it."
"Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in." Those
are the only words gun owners should ever need to remember. Never has
the anti-gun agenda been stated more succinctly or, for that matter,
more honestly.
And now Sen. Feinstein is back trying to keep
alive the ban Bill Clinton inflicted on law-abiding Americans. Joined
by comrades such as Sens. Chuck Schumer and Ted Kennedy, she has
introduced S.1034, the "Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of
2003." It makes the Clinton gun ban permanent and also bans the
importation of large-capacity magazines. Certainly Feinstein's bill
is less "ambitious" than McCarthy's and undoubtedly will be portrayed
as a "reasonable," and "common-sense" alternative by firearm-phobic
editorial writers at the New York Times and Washington
Post.
The truth, of course, lies elsewhere and was
admitted to recently by, of all people, Chuck Schumer, who confessed
to the Los Angeles Times, "We know if we push it too far, we'll have
no bill." Translation: "Don't threaten Mr. and Mrs. America too
much." And don't remind them that the semi- automatic firearms they
own for self-defense, hunting and target shooting function
identically to those "assault weapons" you want to ban.
The "assault weapons" debate, as we saw in 1994,
is most often ruled by emotion, not by fact, and therefore it was a
tailor-made issue for the ethically challenged Clinton Administration
and its allies. But the truth cannot be buried forever, not even in
Washington, D.C.
"It might be 50 years before the United States gets to
where Britain is today. Passing a law like the assault
weapon ban is a symbolic--purely symbolic--move in that
direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce
crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of
weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation."
--Charles Krauthammer, Washington
Post, April 5, 1996
|
That's exactly why, in the first election
following enactment of the ban, gun owners went to the polls in great
numbers and, for the first time in 134 years, unseated the U.S.
Speaker of the House.
That's why Bill Clinton told the Cleveland Plain
Dealer: "The fight for the assault weapons ban cost 20 members their
seats in Congress."
That's why in March 1996, 239 members of the House
of Representatives voted across party lines to repeal the Clinton gun
ban.
The debate is not really about so-called "assault
weapons." It's about banning guns. It's about gun prohibitionists
searching for the easiest target of opportunity. They're going after
guns that are scary-looking to many folks, claiming, without a shred
of credible evidence, that these guns are the "weapons of choice" of
criminals. It's a lie. A day after Bill Clinton signed his
gun-banning crime bill into law, a Washington Post editorial
admitted: "Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of
crime. The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it
turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun
control."
"(Some) criminologists relate the decline (in violent
crime) to everything from a sudden surge in the efficacy
of gun control laws, which is patently absurd, to changes
in patterns of drug use. . . . Here's a better
explanation: The decline can be explained in part by
policy-driven law enforcement efforts that capitalize on
community crime-fighting initiatives and take the bad
guys off the streets."
--John DiIulio, Wall Street
Journal, Sept. 6, 1995
|
In the words of Josh Sugarmann, leader of the
radical Violence Policy Center: "The public's confusion over
fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault
weapons--anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a
machine gun--can only increase the chance of public support for
restrictions on these weapons." Machine guns were, of course,
effectively banned in 1934.
Jacob Sullum, a senior editor at Reason magazine,
captures the issue well: "The 'assault weapon' ban sets a dangerous
precedent precisely because the justification for it is so weak. It
suggests that you don't need a good reason to limit the right to keep
and bear arms, and it invites further restrictions down the road. As
far as the gun banners are concerned, that is the whole
point."
H.R. 2038: A Giant Step Down Gun Control's Slippery
Slope
On May 14, the Washington Post
reported House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) as
saying most House members are willing to let the ban
expire next year. That, the Post warned, would deal "a
significant blow to the campaign to clamp down on gun
sales nationwide." Count on the Post doing its best to
drum up votes for legislation like H.R. 2038, which
would:
- Ban every gun made to legally
comply with the Clinton ban.
- Ban "any" semi-automatic shotgun
or rifle an Attorney General claims isn't
"sporting."
- Ban target shooting rifles: the
Colt AR-15, Springfield M1A and M1 "Garand," for
example.
- Ban guns, such as the Ruger
Mini-14, the Clinton ban expressly exempted by
name.
- Ban semi-automatic shotguns that
have "any characteristic" that "can function as a
grip."
- Ban detachable-magazine
semi-automatic rifles that have "any characteristic"
that "can function as a grip."
- Ban 65 named guns.
- Ban semi-auto fixed-magazine
pistols of over 10 rounds capacity.
- Ban frames, receivers and parts
used to repair or refurbish guns.
- Ban importation of magazines
exempted by the Clinton ban.
- Ban selling an "assault weapon"
with a magazine of 10+ rounds capacity.
- Begin backdoor registration by
requiring manufacturers of guns, frames, receivers and
other parts to report the names of their dealers.
Require dealers to report the guns and parts in
stock.
- Ban private sales of the guns and
parts. Next step: register purchasers.
|
Also see Chris
W. Cox's letter to members of Congress in response to a
"Dear Colleague" letter from Representatives John Conyers and Carolyn
McCarthy seeking cosponsorship of their "Assault Weapons Ban and Law
Enforcement Protection Act of 2003." |