What's Next for Gun Rights?

Josey1

What's Next for Gun Rights? As America bears arms, let's protect our right to keep them. BY MICHAEL BANE Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:01 a.m. EST We've heard a lot lately about supposed wartime threats to civil liberties. But one constitutional right--the right to keep and bear arms--is likely to become more secure in the wake of Sept. 11. Since the atrocities in New York and Washington, gun sales have shot through the roof. Gun-industry sources say many of the buyers are first-time women purchasers. And America is not just buying guns; America is arming. Unlike other periods of "panic" buying, such as the aftermath of Bill Clinton's election, these purchases are mirrored by increases in concealed-carry applications (anywhere from 25% to several hundred percent, depending on the area) and requests for firearms training. A survey by the Polling Company, taken in mid-October, found that 31% of the 1,000 people sampled valued their Second Amendment rights "much more" after Sept. 11, with 14% answering "somewhat more." A Zogby poll, also in mid-October, found 66% of their sample agreeing that people who have had a background check and safety training should be allowed to carry a gun on their person or in their car.The past year has been good in other ways for gun-rights advocates. Gun control was indeed the defining issue of the 2000 presidential election, but not in the way Democratic strategists envisioned. Since President Bush took office, both the Justice Department and the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals have endorsed the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms. Municipal lawsuits against gun makers have been tossed out of court, and the most heralded antigun book in a decade, Michael Bellesiles's "Arming America," stands exposed as a hoax.All this puts gun-rights activists in an unaccustomed position. For years we've been masters of defense--attack dogs in place, ready to block, to strangle, to head off, to stifle, to vote down; excellent at articulating exactly what we don't want. Now that we're in a position of strength, what do we want? Herewith some suggestions: A national concealed carry permit. Despite the endless cries of "Oh no! Another Dodge City," 33 states, with more than half America's population, have laws providing that every legally qualified adult may receive a permit to carry a concealed handgun. Instead of Dodge City (can't editorial writers come up with a more original metaphor?), violent crime drops. Women in particular benefit. We've had more than a decade since Florida liberalized its laws to study concealed carry in action, plus John Lott's exhaustive research as documented in "More Guns; Less Crime." Concealed-carry works. The least we can ask for is that states be required to recognize permits issued by other states. This would not be such a leap; after all, it's what we do with driver's licenses. Eddie Eagle firearms safety training in schools. God forbid we have firearms safety education in schools, the antigun refrain goes, because it might encourage kids to shoot. Hmm, so sex education in schools, the great shibboleth of our liberal education system, doesn't encourage kids to have sex, but firearms-safety education encourages kids to have guns? Firearms are already amazingly safe; the National Safety Council's Injury Facts report for 2000 shows accident firearms deaths to be at an all-time low. The Eddie Eagle program would make them even safer. Rapprochement with the media. OK, let's start with a clean sheet of newsprint. Yes, you've been biased as all get-out (and, yes, we can prove it; even your own studies back us up). But let's try this for a start--any bias, antigun or otherwise, is an ethical issue and should be treated accordingly. That means reporters who reprint or rubber-stamp press releases from Sarah Brady, the Violence Policy Center, Americans for Gun Safety or any other antigun groups under the guise of news should be fired. Perhaps the producers of the increasingly influential morning shows--which, according to a Media Research Center report last year, average about 10 antigun stories for every pro-gun story--could peek out of their offices in Manhattan for a reality check. And by the way, time to send the phrase gun nut to the scrap heap along with every other slur banished in the name of sensitivity. A fair recognition of the shooting sports. While they'll never be up there with the National Football League, they are included in the Olympics (if you've never seen them on American television, take my word for it). Last summer, 25,000 paying spectators turned out for the cowboy shooting world championships--an event that uses weapons made prior to 1900 and requires its participants to dress in appropriate western drag. As many as 100,000 people attended the Grand American shotgun matches. When the sports end up on television, we even get good ratings. Repeal, or allow to sunset, the "feel good" gun laws passed in the Clinton years and earlier. The assault weapon ban, and the ban on larger capacity magazines, were based not on serious studies, but on antigun press releases. Yes, some guns are uglier than others; no, criminals don't like the ugly ones any better. So far, these laws have had zero effect--zero--on crime and are basically tools to be used by unscrupulous prosecutors against law-abiding gun owners. And they have been used--ask any California owner of the dread "assault" rifle, which even the state of California can't seem to define but is perfectly willing to prosecute. A little civility, please. We are profoundly tired of being demonized, especially since "we" include about half the country. The controversy over guns has always been the visible manifestation of a deeper and more troubling conflicts--urban vs. rural; South and West vs. Northeast and California; elite vs. working class--differing visions of who we are and what it means to be an American. We, as firearms owners and users, are not deluded, misguided or minions of Satan. Rather, we are people who believe that our safety is, and always has been, in our own hands. For many Americans, Sept. 11 underscored that the government isn't always able to protect its citizens from danger. And it reminded all of us that what we have in common as Americans is far more important than what divides us. Mr. Bane is director of the National Shooting Sports Foundation's media seminar program. http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=95001545