home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=90TT0247>
- <title>
- Jan. 29, 1990: The Case For Firearms. . .
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1990
- Jan. 29, 1990 Who Is The NRA?
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- NATION, Page 22
- COVER STORIES
- The Case for Firearms...</hdr>
- <body>
- <p>The N.R.A.'s executive vice president says guns will keep
- America free
- </p>
- <p>By J. Warren Cassidy
- </p>
- <p> The American people have a right "to keep and bear arms."
- This right is protected by the Second Amendment to the
- Constitution, just as the right to publish editorial comment in
- this magazine is protected by the First Amendment. Americans
- remain committed to the constitutional right to free speech even
- when their most powerful oracles have, at times, abused the
- First Amendment's inherent powers. Obviously the American people
- believe no democracy can survive without a free voice.
- </p>
- <p> In the same light, the authors of the Bill of Rights knew
- that a democratic republic has a right--indeed, a need--to
- keep and bear arms. Millions of American citizens just as
- adamantly believe the Second Amendment is crucial to the
- maintenance of the democratic process. Many express this belief
- through membership in the National Rifle Association of America.
- </p>
- <p> Our cause is neither trendy nor fashionable, but a basic
- American belief that spans generations. The N.R.A.'s strength
- has never originated in Washington but instead has reached
- outward and upward from Biloxi, Albuquerque, Concord, Tampa,
- Topeka--from every point on the compass and from communities
- large and small. Those who fail to grasp this widespread
- commitment will never understand the depth of political and
- philosophical dedication symbolized by the letters N.R.A.
- </p>
- <p> Scholars who have devoted careers to the study of the
- Second Amendment agree in principle that the right to keep and
- bear arms is fundamental to our concept of democracy. No
- high-court decision has yet found grounds to challenge this
- basic freedom. Yet some who oppose this freedom want to waive
- the constitutionality of the "gun control" question for the
- sake of their particular--and sometimes peculiar--brand of
- social reform.
- </p>
- <p> In doing so they seem ready, even eager, to disregard a
- constitutional right exercised by at least 70 million Americans
- who own firearms. Contrary to current antigun evangelism, these
- gun owners are not bad people. They are hardworking, law
- abiding, tax paying. They are safe, sane and courteous in their
- use of guns. They have never been, nor will they ever be, a
- threat to law-and-order.
- </p>
- <p> History repeatedly warns us that human character cannot be
- scrubbed free of its defects through vain attempts to regulate
- inanimate objects such as guns. What has worked in the past, and
- what we see working now, are tough, N.R.A.-supported measures
- that punish the incorrigible minority who place themselves
- outside the law.
- </p>
- <p> As a result of such measures, violent crimes with firearms,
- like assault and robbery, have stabilized or are actually
- declining. We see proof that levels of firearm ownership cannot
- be associated with levels of criminal violence, except for their
- deterrent value. On the other hand, tough laws designed to
- incarcerate violent offenders offer something gun control
- cannot: swift, sure justice meted out with no accompanying
- erosion of individual liberty.
- </p>
- <p> Violent crime continues to rise in cities like New York and
- Washington even after severe firearm-control statutes were
- rushed into place. Criminals, understandably, have illegal ways
- of obtaining guns. Antigun laws--the waiting periods,
- background checks, handgun bans, et al.--only harass those who
- obey them. Why should an honest citizen be deprived of a firearm
- for sport or self-defense when, for a gangster, obtaining a gun
- is just a matter of showing up on the right street corner with
- enough money?
- </p>
- <p> Antigun opinion steadfastly ignores these realities known to
- rank-and-file police officers--men and women who face crime
- firsthand, not police administrators who face mayors and
- editors. These law-enforcement professionals tell us that
- expecting firearm restrictions to act as crime-prevention
- measures is wishful thinking. They point out that proposed gun
- laws would not have stopped heinous crimes committed by the
- likes of John Hinckley Jr., Patrick Purdy, Laurie Dann or
- mentally disturbed, usually addicted killers. How can such
- crimes be used as examples of what gun control could prevent?
- </p>
- <p> There are better ways to advance our society than to excuse
- criminal behavior. The N.R.A. initiated the first hunter-safety
- program, which has trained millions of young hunters. We are the
- shooting sports' leading safety organization, with more than
- 26,000 certified instructors training 750,000 students and
- trainees last year alone. Through 1989 there were 9,818
- N.R.A.-certified law- enforcement instructors teaching
- marksmanship to thousands of peace officers.
- </p>
- <p> Frankly, we would rather keep investing N.R.A. resources in
- such worthwhile efforts instead of spending our time and
- members' money debunking the failed and flawed promises of gun
- prohibitionists.
- </p>
- <p> If you agree, I invite you to join the N.R.A.
- </p>
-
- </body>
- </article>
- </text>
-
-