In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
It's Ashcroft-Metzenbaum vs. NRA
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
It's Ashcroft-Metzenbaum vs. NRA
04/20/02
Bill Sloat
Plain Dealer Reporter
Cincinnati
- A blistering battle over gun control, set for a showdown in a federal courtroom in Ohio next week, has created one of the oddest alliances in American history.
From Our Advertisers
The Justice Department of U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, a life member of the National Rifle Association, has quietly enlisted a lifelong enemy of the gun lobby, retired Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, in the government's fight against assault weapons. So quietly, in fact, that Metzenbaum didn't even know about it.
"Wow! Never in a million years would I expect this to happen," Metzenbaum, 84, said when he learned that Ashcroft's assistants had pored over his Senate record to buttress legal arguments for a brief aimed at preserving a federal law that restricts access to the guns.
"I guess this goes to prove the old adage: If you live long enough, you might see anything."
Metzenbaum, who retired eight years ago, is an unabashed liberal Democrat from Cleveland. While in office, he was detested by Republican conservatives in Ohio and across the nation.
Ashcroft got his position in the Bush administration by being one of the nation's most visible conservatives - the anti-Metzenbaum.
But through twists they never could have imagined, the ideological foes have wound up on the same side in a landmark case that could alter the national gun-control debate. Their opponent in the lawsuit is Ashcroft's ally, the NRA.
On Tuesday, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments over whether an assault-weapons ban imposed by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 violates the Constitution.
"The outcome of this case will significantly affect the future safety of the public and law-enforcement officers," says Richard Rosen, a Washington lawyer who represents the 14 outside groups, including 10 national law-enforcement agencies, that are supporting the ban.
Metzenbaum was one of the chief sponsors of the ban, which concluded that the net effect of military features on some semiautomatic rifles made them a menace to society and made them especially useful to drug dealers and violent gangs.
He argued that assault rifles with combat hardware were not needed by hunters and sportsmen. Foes have argued ever since that some assault rifles are still on the market, while others nearly identical are banned. They say the law has created an irrational situation.
But the Justice Department says the ban should stand. And as attorney general, Ashcroft has to enforce and defend existing laws, even those that he might disagree with.
Ashcroft fashioned his political career opposing virtually all gun-control legislation, including the ban on the sale of assault weapons. Two years ago, when Ashcroft ran for re-election to the Senate and lost, the NRA spent more than $300,000 on his behalf in Missouri.
Jim Warner, an NRA lawyer representing two gun manufacturers and two gun dealers in the Cincinnati lawsuit, said he, too, was surprised to find Metzenbaum's denunciations of guns sprinkled through the government's court filings.
"I guess they have to go every possible source to give themselves cover. If you don't have the law on your side, you have to go with what you've got," Warner said. Justice Department lawyers could not be reached for comment.
Unlike most gun-control cases, the one headed to court Tuesday is not focused on the Second Amendment, which contains the clause granting Americans the right to bear arms. Instead, the dispute involves the First Amendment, with the manufacturers saying Congress trampled free speech by enacting a list of names of guns that could not be sold in the United States.
"So if the law protects some and bans others, we say there is no rational basis for that," Warner said. "If you control what a manufacturer names a product, that infringes on free speech."
The Justice Department argues that was not the intent of Congress. It says the guns listed by name were those that were traced most frequently to criminals.
Metzenbaum's Senate remarks were quoted to back that up. In one speech, he pointed out that an imported gun banned during Ronald Reagan's administration popped up under a new name when it was built in America.
"After [ATF] banned the importation of a South African riot-control shotgun called the Striker 12 in 1986, American manufacturers subsequently marketed a copy, which they renamed the Street Sweeper, boasting that it was barred from importation," Metzenbaum said.
The former senator isn't involved in the current battle, but there's no doubt where his sentiments lie. "I don't know that I agree with the NRA at all on anything," he said. "I have no reservations about the constitutionality of trying to limit access to guns."
Contact Bill Sloat at:
bsloat@plaind.com, 513-631-4125
http://www.cleveland.com/ohio/plaindealer/index.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news/10192951052312857.xml
c 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
04/20/02
Bill Sloat
Plain Dealer Reporter
Cincinnati
- A blistering battle over gun control, set for a showdown in a federal courtroom in Ohio next week, has created one of the oddest alliances in American history.
From Our Advertisers
The Justice Department of U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, a life member of the National Rifle Association, has quietly enlisted a lifelong enemy of the gun lobby, retired Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, in the government's fight against assault weapons. So quietly, in fact, that Metzenbaum didn't even know about it.
"Wow! Never in a million years would I expect this to happen," Metzenbaum, 84, said when he learned that Ashcroft's assistants had pored over his Senate record to buttress legal arguments for a brief aimed at preserving a federal law that restricts access to the guns.
"I guess this goes to prove the old adage: If you live long enough, you might see anything."
Metzenbaum, who retired eight years ago, is an unabashed liberal Democrat from Cleveland. While in office, he was detested by Republican conservatives in Ohio and across the nation.
Ashcroft got his position in the Bush administration by being one of the nation's most visible conservatives - the anti-Metzenbaum.
But through twists they never could have imagined, the ideological foes have wound up on the same side in a landmark case that could alter the national gun-control debate. Their opponent in the lawsuit is Ashcroft's ally, the NRA.
On Tuesday, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments over whether an assault-weapons ban imposed by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 violates the Constitution.
"The outcome of this case will significantly affect the future safety of the public and law-enforcement officers," says Richard Rosen, a Washington lawyer who represents the 14 outside groups, including 10 national law-enforcement agencies, that are supporting the ban.
Metzenbaum was one of the chief sponsors of the ban, which concluded that the net effect of military features on some semiautomatic rifles made them a menace to society and made them especially useful to drug dealers and violent gangs.
He argued that assault rifles with combat hardware were not needed by hunters and sportsmen. Foes have argued ever since that some assault rifles are still on the market, while others nearly identical are banned. They say the law has created an irrational situation.
But the Justice Department says the ban should stand. And as attorney general, Ashcroft has to enforce and defend existing laws, even those that he might disagree with.
Ashcroft fashioned his political career opposing virtually all gun-control legislation, including the ban on the sale of assault weapons. Two years ago, when Ashcroft ran for re-election to the Senate and lost, the NRA spent more than $300,000 on his behalf in Missouri.
Jim Warner, an NRA lawyer representing two gun manufacturers and two gun dealers in the Cincinnati lawsuit, said he, too, was surprised to find Metzenbaum's denunciations of guns sprinkled through the government's court filings.
"I guess they have to go every possible source to give themselves cover. If you don't have the law on your side, you have to go with what you've got," Warner said. Justice Department lawyers could not be reached for comment.
Unlike most gun-control cases, the one headed to court Tuesday is not focused on the Second Amendment, which contains the clause granting Americans the right to bear arms. Instead, the dispute involves the First Amendment, with the manufacturers saying Congress trampled free speech by enacting a list of names of guns that could not be sold in the United States.
"So if the law protects some and bans others, we say there is no rational basis for that," Warner said. "If you control what a manufacturer names a product, that infringes on free speech."
The Justice Department argues that was not the intent of Congress. It says the guns listed by name were those that were traced most frequently to criminals.
Metzenbaum's Senate remarks were quoted to back that up. In one speech, he pointed out that an imported gun banned during Ronald Reagan's administration popped up under a new name when it was built in America.
"After [ATF] banned the importation of a South African riot-control shotgun called the Striker 12 in 1986, American manufacturers subsequently marketed a copy, which they renamed the Street Sweeper, boasting that it was barred from importation," Metzenbaum said.
The former senator isn't involved in the current battle, but there's no doubt where his sentiments lie. "I don't know that I agree with the NRA at all on anything," he said. "I have no reservations about the constitutionality of trying to limit access to guns."
Contact Bill Sloat at:
bsloat@plaind.com, 513-631-4125
http://www.cleveland.com/ohio/plaindealer/index.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news/10192951052312857.xml
c 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878