The gun-law sky is falling?

By J.R. Labbe

Star-Telegram Staff Writer

Chicken Little arrives every four years in a feather-ruffled
flurry squawking about some kind of impending doom. This
year she is incited to a level of hen-ish hysteria by the
encroaching expiration of the federal “assault weapons” ban.

Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry is all for
extending the ban on 19 military-style firearms, coos
Chicken Little. He suspended his campaign back in March so
he could go to Washington and cast one of the few Senate
votes he found time to make in the past year. No one should
read anything political into that.

But that bad ol’ President Bush, clucks the harried hen, he
said he’d sign an extension of the ban, but he isn’t doing
anything to force those nasty, gun-loving, NRA-co-opted
Republicans to bring it to a vote.

Chickie needs to pipe down and revisit what the president
did say about the ban, adopted by Congress and signed by
President Clinton in 1994. Bush said he’d sign the
extension if it made it to his desk. He never promised to
pressure lawmakers into getting it to that point.

This is just one more example of how hysteria and ignorance
can warp understanding of an issue.

The uninformed make audacious claims: “If the ban expires,
it will become legal to buy dangerous, rapid-fire guns most
commonly seen in action movies.”

First, all firearms are dangerous, which is why it is so
important to teach children never to think they are toys.
But this line from a Statesman Journal editorial, which ran
last month in the Salem, Ore., newspaper, equates the
firearms covered by the ban with machine guns.

Even if the ban is lifted, John Q. Schnutz still will not be
able to purchase fully automatic machine guns, which are
highly regulated.

“A tidal wave of assault weapons will soon legally flood the
country unless Congress acts quickly to renew expiring
federal legislation,” screamed the editorial page of Utah’s
Deseret Sun last month. “Just what we don’t need — more
opportunities for deadlier weapons to fall into the hands of
criminals — and more ‘play toys’ to attract our children’s
attention.”

Gracious. Dilute that rhetoric with some facts, and you
find that the guns banned under the Federal Violent Crime
Control Act of 1994 are no deadlier than my .22-250 deer
rifle.

Chickadees, let’s take a breath and do some fact-checking on
what the “assault weapons” ban did and did not do.

The 1994 crime bill forbade the manufacture and import of
certain guns that Congress defined as “assault weapons.”

These firearms were classified by how they looked and not by
how they operate. Cosmetic and ergonomic features like
telescoping stocks, bayonet lugs, pistol grips and flash
suppressors that give the firearms a military-style
appearance were banned even though they are mechanically
indistinguishable from traditional sporting rifles.

The provision that banned “high-capacity” ammunition
magazines is also scheduled to expire Sept. 13, although the
House bill calling for the ban’s extension does not mention
high-capacity magazines.

The ban did not outlaw ownership of semi-automatic guns.
Banned “assault weapons” have always been available on the
secondary market, and owners of those guns don’t break any
law by reselling them.

The fact that you don’t have to wear body armor and take
your kids to school behind a bulletproof shield proves that
the preponderance of America’s gun owners are responsible,
law-abiding people with no interest in committing crime.

Calling these guns the “weapons of choice for criminals” and
“weapons whose only purpose is to kill people” reveals
deliberate denial of reality. A National Institute of
Justice study released in 1999 — gee, who was president
then? — said exactly the opposite. “Assault weapons” were
rarely used to commit murder in this country.

As to the emotion-laden “kill people” assertion: Shooting
enthusiasts use military-style firearms to “kill” nothing
more than pieces of paper or metal targets. Easy to
operate, reliable and accurate, they make sport and
competitive shooting fun.

Of course, the anti-gunners cite those same characteristics
as something purely evil.

It is interesting to note that Kerry is not as vocal as his
more enthusiastic supporters on this issue.

Rural voters in those all-important swing states of
Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania own guns. Some of them view
extending the ban as a step toward more restrictive gun laws
that might next target that trusty ol’ deer rifle — which
operates exactly like those dreaded “assault weapons.”

The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security!!!