Posted on 02/26/2008 8:22:55 AM PST by kiriath_jearim
By putting guns into the hands of terrorists, criminals and the mentally ill, the NRA helped create a society where defense by guns becomes mandatory.
LET'S GET THIS out of the way. I am a gun owner and a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment. What I do not support is extending the rights embedded in the Second Amendment to terrorists, criminals and children.
In the wake of a horrific campus shooting at Northern Illinois University, where 21 students were shot, we're reminded again that national gun laws must be strengthened.
Sadly, gun laws have only been weakened since the massacres at Columbine High School and Virginia Tech. To be sure, these headline-grabbing mass shootings may not have been preventable. But beyond the headlines, consider this news: 83 Americans die each and every day from gun violence. And much of that violence is very preventable.
Current federal law allows an unlimited number of easily concealable handguns and military-style weapons to be sold privately in 32 states without a criminal background check or an ID. Why do we take such a hands-off approach to these dangerous weapons? The National Rifle Association and the gun industry lobby are a big part of the answer.
You have to show ID to purchase alcohol or cigarettes. But if you want a Barrett .50-caliber sniper rifle (capable of penetrating steel and taking out an armored vehicle from more than a mile) you need only to show up at one of 5,000 legal gun shows and fork over the cash -- no ID or background check required! It is well documented that al-Qaida, Hezbollah and IRA terrorists have exploited this loophole in U.S. gun laws to purchase military-style weapons from "private sellers" at gun shows.
In a recent radio debate with me, an NRA official confirmed that the organization is opposed to uniform criminal background checks for fear they will "shut down gun shows." The NRA says that not even people on the suspected terrorist watch list should be barred from purchasing guns because -- are you ready for this? -- "we do not know how people are put on the list" and "many times people are victims of mistaken identity."
Eighty-nine percent of Americans said they wanted mandatory background checks for anyone buying a gun, according to a 2007 Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and The Tarrance Group survey. But the NRA has continually blocked such common-sense legislation as mandatory background checks and five-day waiting periods to buy a handgun. NRA policies handcuff national law enforcement's ability to effectively regulate private gun sales, gun shows, and even the sharing of crime-gun trace data within the law enforcement community.
By putting guns into the hands of terrorists, criminals and the mentally ill, the NRA helped create a society where defense by guns becomes mandatory. Meanwhile, the bank accounts of the NRA leaders and lobbyists are enriched and congressional coffers are replenished. Gun manufacturers reinforce this cycle by investing in the NRA.
$22 million to influence candidates
According to Federal Elections Commission reports, the NRA has spent more than $22 million on congressional candidates in order to support its agenda during the past four election cycles. In 2004, the NRA spent nearly $4 million to reelect George W. Bush.
Immunity from lawsuits and freedom from consumer protection regulations and manufacturing standards are just a few of the benefits delivered by the NRA and provided by a complicit president and Congress.
Massachusetts stands out as an example of a state that has successful gun violence prevention legislation. Along with 17 other states, it has enacted background checks for all gun sales. Only Hawaii has a firearms fatality rate lower than that of Massachusetts. Hawaii is fortunate; bordered by water, it is less accessible to gun traffickers than Massachusetts, where more than 60 percent of guns traced to crime come from out of state.
Bay State neighbors New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine are three of the top four crime-gun source states for Massachusetts, where guns are easily purchased by prohibited buyers without a background check or an ID.
Most law-abiding citizens like me buy guns from federally licensed dealers required to perform background checks. Incredibly, federal law allows criminals and terrorists who can't pass background checks to easily buy guns from private individuals in 32 states without detection.
The bloodshed in our communities and schools is largely preventable. Of course, no law is going to stop violence completely, but shouldn't we help prevent the tragedies we can by weeding out the criminals? It is time for reasonable people to insist that Congress enact sensible and consistent federal laws that require criminal background checks for all gun sales in the United States.
[John E. Rosenthal is cofounder of Stop Handgun Violence, the American Hunters and Shooters Association, and Common Sense About Kids and Guns.]
Gee John....just "up" armor your limo. I see from other threads the elites are on the .50 bandwagon again.
I don’t dress up and pretend to be a liberal. Why do they try to act conservative? It just doesn’t work. Scumbags.
Now how many would any reasonable person deduct from that total that were gang-bangers shooting each other ( no loss there) and criminals shot by cops?
My guess would be 75%.
This guy must be one of those hard line right wing conservatives who are coming out for Obama. Har har.
There is so much in this article that is an outright lie that it is very difficult to believe ANY of the so-called facts this “Gun owner” puts forth. Antagonists to a particular ideology eventually get so frustrated and so conditioned in their stretching of the facts and data to make their case seem reasonable that they soon drop the truth altogether. A lie is a lie is a lie is a lie....until you tell it so often that it BECOMES the truth....
That’s right, AHSA is a false-flag organization that was started about 2-3 years ago by antis. It gets unquestioning legitamacy from liberal mainstream media. It gets its money from the usual anti-gun funding sources. Someone pointed out that that their membership was so low (they claim something like a few hundred) that their annual dues couldn’t even pay the annual salary of its president, and the AHSA replied that large donations provide most of their money.
Mass having the second lowest gun death rate sounds unlikely—does anyone know how to check that?
Adding something like the terror watchlist for the criminal check system would be a total boondoggle. Names are added to that list as a CYA measure for various security agencies, and a huge number of Americans would lose a basic civil right over that.
Most of the guns at gunshows are sold by licensed dealers who run the criminal checks anyway.
The thing that bothers me the most about running criminal checks on all private party sales is you can’t even sell a gun to your neighbor without driving to a gun store first and paying 50 bucks or so.
Buying a firearm at a gun show where I live in California (where we have to do the check) sounds like more of a hassle than its worth, so I have never even attempted it. I would just buy a gun off the Internet anyway if my local gun store didn’t have one, and those have to be shipped to a gun store, which runs you through the criminal check system.
I recent fed DOJ study showed that criminals almost never buy their guns at a gunshow anyway. They get them from robberies, then trade tham on the black market.
He is no more a “staunch supporter of the Second Amendment” than Sarah Brady or Ted Kennedy. NONE of his suggestions would have stopped the murders at NIU or VT. They would only make it more difficult for law abiding people to privately purchase a firearm.
According to the latest figures in the Statistical Abstract of the United States 2008, Table 111.
In 2004, the rate of death per 100,000 from firearms was 4.0 for homicide, and 5.7 for suicide. For the same year, the rate of death from vehicle accidents was 16.6. To get these as percentages, move the decimal point three places to the left.
Sounds awesome but unlikely. If it's true, can anyone point me in the direction of one of these gun shows in the northeast(or closest to here)?
I probably wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for a waiting period. If they gave me a gun when I wanted it, bad things could have happened.
Waiting periods of a few days for first-time buyers help prevent crimes of passion and suicide.
But waiting as long as 30 days or waiting if you already own a gun are dumb.
The NRA says that not even people on the suspected terrorist watch list should be barred from purchasing guns because -- are you ready for this? -- "we do not know how people are put on the list" and "many times people are victims of mistaken identity."
The NRA is right.
"Suspected terrorist" watch lists are just ripe for abuse. The government can put you on one without any warning, with no evidence, and once you're on it there is no recourse, no way to get off.
Criminal convictions are one thing. But your name on some list somewhere? No way.
If this was not a blatant lie, then it would be possible for such a super-majority to amend the Constitution practically overnight. The author only wishes it were true. If not for lies, the anti-gunners would have very little to say.
>>If they gave me a gun when I wanted it, bad things could have happened<<
Not to sound harsh,but I think “I would have made bad things happen” would be a more appropriate phrase.
Does that mean that you decided not to complete a purchase and that you don't own a gun today?
I live close to the National NRA Office. I see them everyday out in the street handing out guns. /sarcasm
That's an indisputable fact. Remember the incident where Senator Ted Kennedy got on the list somehow? As dangerous as he may be to anyone foolish enough to accept a ride from him, I doubt that he poses any risk whatsoever of being part of a terrorist hijacking plot.
The fact that this joker doesn't address the many incidents of errors (and possibly petty bureaucratic "screw you" harassment) associated with these lists is sufficient in itself to dismiss his opinion as worthless.
Add in "criminals shot by their intended victims" and you're probably in the 80%-90% range.
I never wanted to shoot anyone else. I was fighting depression and almost lost the battle that day. You're not the same person when the disease takes control.
Does that mean that you decided not to complete a purchase and that you don't own a gun today?
I don't own one today for the above reason. I'm more scared of myself than the very small handful of crimes that happen in this town.
I feel good now but want to wait a few years to make sure symptoms don't come back. I didn't take any of the meds but changed my diet to natural vitamin-rich foods instead.
IMO, all the extreme junk food I used to eat caused the depression. There are lots of chemicals in food that are never tested for psychological effects.
oops. see my #39.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.