The Unsorted BBS Collection/thegreatunsorted.tar/thegreatunsorted/texts/txtfiles_misc/news84b

Text File | 1993-03-05 | 4KB | 68 lines

Part 2 of 3
   In this round, a number of factors combined to defeat the NRA.
   Law enforcement officials convinced the public that gunrunning
was a major crime problem. Urban and suburban lawmakers, sensitive
to the handgun violence in their communities, used their political
muscle. And Democratic Gov. L. Douglas Wilder and Republican U.S.
Attorney Richard Cullen effectively orchestrated a bipartisan
coalition of police, prosecutors, parents, teachers and business
leaders that overwhelmed the NRA's usually successful lobbying
efforts.
   But most important, the NRA was the principal architect of its
own demise, some politicians say. Its officials opposed the handgun
control bills proposed by both Republicans and Democrats. The group
became isolated and viewed as extremist.
   "I don't know who is calling the shots (for the NRA) in
Washington," said Russell, a gun-rights supporter who also had an
A-plus NRA rating. "But he probably belongs to that 1 percent that
is throwing bombs.  . . .  They haven't positioned themselves well
for the future."
   Once he announced his support for limiting handgun purchases to
one a month, Miller, a GOP gubernatorial candidate, said he received
hundreds of calls, some of them nasty in tone.
   "I have voted with that interest group . . .  99.9 percent of the
time," Miller told his fellow delegates during the speech. "But God
help the person who even disagrees that one-tenth of 1 percent."
   Del. G. Steven Agee (R-Roanoke), who had been given an A rating
by the NRA, was surprised by the "vehemence and the vulgarity" of a
small percentage of NRA members after he helped develop a compromise
plan that would require police permission for multiple handgun
purchases.
   Russell, who supported the compromise version, contended that a
small, vocal group within the NRA and the group's leadership may not
reflect the opinions of most NRA members. Many gun-rights supporters
did not consider some of the gun control measures, particularly the
Republican-sponsored compromise, as an egregious trampling of their
rights.
   "The one-handgun-per-month issue may have divided their
constituency," said Franklin Zimring, professor of law at the
University of California at Berkeley.
   "I can put up with a little inconvenience if it is going to save
one life," said NRA member Anthony Santoro, of Newport News, who
publicly supported handgun limits. "The NRA has been characterized
by stridency, which is unfortunate."
   LaPierre acknowledged that some members were ambivalent about the
one-gun-a-month bill, but he said that NRA executives had a
"responsibility to lead."
   The "critical decision for any interest group is knowing when to
compromise and when to hold the line," Morris said. "Even
conservative Republicans were looking for a compromise."
   Agee said the decision to support the one-handgun-a-month bill
was the most difficult he had made as a lawmaker. He said that he
remains "philosophically uncomfortable" with the limit but that he
decided to back the bill after concluding Virginia had become a
catalyst in the cycle of drug trafficking and gunrunning.
   "You can't look at a crisis and answer it with rhetoric," Agee
said.
   The NRA, meanwhile, was unyielding, fearing that giving in on
this issue would lead to an avalanche of gun control measures.
   LaPierre said that "Republicans told us in a back room that their
compromise was a joke," because it would not work. "Why should we
support something like that?" he asked.
   Instead, the NRA supported strengthening law enforcement and
tougher penalties for criminals.
   But through it all, according to Miller, there was one question
the NRA could never answer: "How many handguns does it take to make
a law-abiding citizen of Virginia happy?"