Posted on 09/10/2003 6:41:40 PM PDT by Brian S
CFA: Strengthen the Federal Assault Weapons Ban 9/10/2003
Press Release Consumer Federation of America 1424 16th Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 www.consumerfed.org
Contact: Naomi Seligman Phone: 202-628-7772 ext. 126
Leading Consumer Advocate, Howard Metzenbaum, with 25 State Consumer, Gun Control and Public Health Groups Call on Congress and President Bush to Strengthen and Renew the Federal Assault Weapons Ban
National and State Groups Demand President Bush Keep His Promise To Support Legislation Before the Assault Weapons Ban Expires, September 13, 2004.
Washington, DC - Retired Senator Howard Metzenbaum and Sonia Wills, mother of bus driver Conrad Johnson, the last victim of the Washington, DC-area sniper attacks, were joined today by 25 state consumer, gun control and public health advocates to announce the launch of a year-long effort to renew and strengthen the federal assault weapons ban due to expire September 13, 2004.
Modeled after California's 1999 Assault Weapons Ban, the speakers voiced their support for S. 1431, sponsored by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), and H.R. 2038 sponsored by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY). The legislation would not only renew the law, but would also strengthen provisions to ban the manufacturing of "post-ban" assault weapons like the Bushmaster XM-15 used by the Washington DC-area sniper.
"Unless Congress and President Bush work together to enact new legislation, UZIs, AK 47s, and a list of other bargain basement military-style killing machines will flood America's streets again," said retired Senator and Consumer Federation of America (CFA) Chairman Howard Metzenbaum. "The existing law is so weak that scores of slightly modified versions of assault weapons banned ten years ago are legally and freely available."
Although President Bush has stated his support for renewing the ban, he has not yet taken action on its behalf. The speakers are calling on the President to stand behind his words. "The American people will not take kindly to a Congress and President who buckle under to the extreme demands of the gun lobby by letting the law expire or simply reenacting the existing weak ban," said Metzenbaum. "The hour has come for President Bush and Congress to once and for all rid America's streets of these weapons of war."
Date of Release: September 4, 2003
Molon Labe
This does not give the GOP a pass to become more like them.
Libertarians, like other Americans, want to be able to walk city streets safely and be secure in their homes. We also want our Constitutional rights protected, to guard against the erosion of our civil liberties. In particular, Libertarians want to see all people treated equally under the law, as our Constitution requires. America's millions of gun owners are people too.
Law-abiding, responsible citizens do not and should not need to ask anyone's permission or approval to engage in a peaceful activity. Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person and cannot morally justify criminal penalties.
Constitutional Rights
America's founders fought the Revolutionary War to throw off British tyranny. Most of the revolutionaries owned and used their own guns in that war. After the war, in 1789, the 13 American States adopted the Constitution, creating the federal government. Before ratifying the Constitution, the people demanded a Bill of Rights to prevent our government from depriving them of their liberties as the British had done.
One of the most important protections we have against government tyranny is that we are presumed innocent of any crime until proven guilty, before a jury, in a proper trial.
But, gun control advocates would declare all gun owners guilty without trial, simply for owning guns. although millions of them have never used their guns to harm another person. Such blanket condemnation is immoral, unfair and contrary to the principles on which America was founded.
The Prohibition Lesson
Gun control advocates are much like the prohibitionists of the early 20th Century. By making liquor illegal, they spawned organized crime, caused bloody, violent turf wars and corrupted the criminal justice system. Today's war on drugs has exactly the same results.
Prohibition didn't stop liquor use; the drug laws can't stop drug use. Making gun ownership illegal will not stop gun ownership.
The primary victim of these misguided efforts is the honest citizen whose civil rights are trampled as frustrated legislators and police tighten the screws.
Banning guns will make guns more expensive and give organized crime a great opportunity to make profits in a new black market for weapons. Street violence will increase in new turf wars. Criminals will not give up their guns. But, many law abiding citizens will, leaving them defenseless against armed bandits.
The Right of Self Defense
Libertarians agree with the majority of Americans who believe they have the right to decide how best to protect themselves, their families and their property. Millions of Americans have guns in their homes and sleep more comfortably because of it. Studies show that where gun ownership is illegal, residential burglaries are higher. A man with a gun in his home is no threat to you if you aren't breaking into it.
The police do not provide security in your home, your business or the street. They show up after the crime to take reports and do detective work. The poorer the neighborhood, the riskier it is for peaceful residents.
Only an armed citizenry can be present in sufficient numbers to prevent or deter violent crime before it starts, or to reduce its spread. Interviews with convicted felons indicate that fear of the armed citizen significantly deters crime. A criminal is more likely to be driven off from a particular crime by an armed victim than to be convicted and imprisoned for it. Thus, widespread gun ownership will make neighborhoods safer.
Foolish politicians and police now seek to ban semi-automatic "assault rifles". They ignore the fact that only honest citizens will comply; criminals will still have them. Such a ban will only increase the criminals' ability to victimize the innocent.
Personal Responsibility
Guns are not the problem. They are inanimate objects. Gun control advocates talk as if guns could act on their own, as if human beings cannot control them, so the uncontrollable guns must be banished.
Let us put the responsibility where it belongs, on the owner and user of the gun. If he or she acts responsibly, without attacking others or causing injury negligently, no crime or harm has been done. Leave them in peace. But, if a person commits a crime with a gun, then impose the severest penalties for the injuries done to the victim. Similarly, hold the negligent gun user fully liable for all harm his negligence does to others.
Rather than banning guns, the politicians and the police should encourage gun ownership, as well as education and training programs. A responsible, well-armed and trained citizenry is the best protection against domestic crime and the threat of foreign invasion. America's founders knew that. It is still true today.
Refresh my memory: How many times over the last 100 years have "assult weapons" been used in the commission of violent crimes in the United States? Now, how many times have baseball bats been used in a similar role? Anyone want to bet which tool is more commonly used for mayhem?
Since when has Howard Metzenbaum been a "Consumer Advocate" Metzenbaum was the leading Senate anti-gun Nazi for decades until he retired and upChuckie Schemer (D, of course, NY, of course) took over that role
And our good friend Naomi Seligman (who used to be Naomi Piss - main mouthpiece for Sara Brady) been a consumer advocate? Seligman is a gun hating, freedom hating, jackboot worshiping neo-Nazi just like Brady.
This is just one more lie on top of the millions already told by the anti-gunners. They don't rely on truth to try and force their religion down our throats because the truth has nothing to do with what they believe - "consumer federation" my a$$
Only if we could get all of the liberals to move back to IL, CA, NY, MA, CT, RI, MD, DE, and NJ first. Anyway, we tried it 140 years ago, and it didn't work then. Doesn't mean that it wasn't a good idea, just that the northern statists had more resources.
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.