|
Of course, we shouldn't be surprised. These same groups - most
notably the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence - were positively giddy in
the wake of events such as the Columbine High School murders. Every
incident of deadly criminal activity presented them with another
opportunity to spread their lies, and the press time after time
responded with unlimited, one-sided coverage.
However, the anti-gun contingent seems to have forgotten one salient
point. We no longer have an aspiring dictator in the White House. We
no longer have a leader who takes his marching orders from Hollywood
celebrities or obese lesbian talkshow hosts. Politicians are not
quite so quick to jump on the confiscation/registration bandwagon as
in years past. After all, even Bill Clinton himself has admitted that
it was likely the animosity of NRA members who cost Al Gore the
presidential vote in his home state of Tennessee.
Before the 2000 election, gun-hating liberals tended to live in a
very insular world, surrounding themselves with other liberals, all
of whom agreed that America's crime problems could be blamed solely
on gun ownership. Stupidly, they neglected to take into consideration
that a hefty percentage of the 90 million American gun owners might
take umbrage at attempts to defile their civil rights. Apparently,
that lesson still hasn't sunk in.
The latest blather from the CSGV is a call for a national system of
ballistic fingerprinting. Their plan is to force gun makers to
test-fire a cartridge through every weapon they manufacture, and then
file the allegedly "distinctive" markings left on the casing into a
law-enforcement data base. "Ballistic fingerprinting increases the
chance of you getting a lead that can take you one step closer" said
Eric Gorovitz of the CSGV.
There's only one problem with Gorovitz's theory. Ballistic
fingerprinting doesn't work. The very act of firing a bullet through
a barrel - the high temperatures, velocity and pressure - change the
"distinctive" markings with nearly every shot. Moreover, there are
two states that already require ballistic fingerprinting - New York
and Maryland. In case anybody forgot, Maryland is where these
shootings began. If ballistic fingerprinting is so effective, then
why isn't the Beltway Sniper already behind bars?
That's easy. As I said, the technology is faulty. The CSGV knows
this, and they also know that the institution of such a requirement
would do nothing to aid in the apprehension of killers. But, a
national data base of guns would be the first step toward a national
data base of gun owners. Such a list would make things very easy
should another gun-grabbing president take office and decide to
arbitrarily repeal the Second Amendment. Just send out the
jack-booted thugs and check off the names.
But as I said, we're lucky. President Bush is completely ignoring the
liberal shouts for KGB style observation and harassment of the
populace. Through his spokesman - Ari Fleischer - Bush uttered in a
couple of simple sentences what should be the true definition of
"common sense gun laws."
"There is an issue about fingerprints (of fingers...not guns) as a
very effective way to catch people who are engaged in robbery or
theft," said Fleischer. "Is that to say that every citizen of the
United States should be fingerprinted in order to catch robbers and
thieves? These same issues are raised here. The President does
believe in the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns."
Fleischer went on to say that the issue was not guns at all, but
rather those who commit crimes with guns.
"In the case of the sniper, the real issue is values. These are the
acts of a depraved killer who has broken and will continue to break
laws, so the question is not new laws."
There you go. Probably the most common sense we've heard out of
Washington since 1992. Bush correctly identifies criminal behavior,
rather than ownership of firearms by honest citizens, as the
root-cause of crimes involving guns. Duh. That is so obvious as to be
ludicrous, however liberals can never understand such simple logic.
It's both too direct and too correct for their nanny state mindset.
It doesn't involve higher taxes, social programs or draconian
measures upon innocent civilians, and thus is not worthy of
consideration.
Do these people really think that new gun laws would be respected and
obeyed by those who are already actively engaged in breaking gun
laws? That's just amazing.
Of course, there are many liberals in Congress who have both veiled,
and not so veiled agendas when it comes to the right to keep and bear
arms. Some of them, who advocate the rights of the state over the
rights of the individual, believe the Senate should consider the
possibility of ballistic fingerprinting.
"I don't think there's any question that it's important for us to
review all of those laws and find ways to ensure that law enforcement
has every tool available to them," said one senior Senator.
I suggest all gun owners remember those words from Tom Daschle when
they go to the polls.
Ron Marr is the Editor and Publisher of The Trout Wrapper magazine
(http://www.troutwrapper.com). His column also appears in newspapers
throughout Montana and South Dakota. Living deep in Montana's Tobacco
Root Mountains with a pack of happily unruly canines, he can be
reached directly at ron1359@yahoo.com
Published by permission.
|
