TWO MADISON AWARD WINNERS
The Second Amendment Foundation is presenting James Madison Awards to a syndicated writer and a Washington, D.C. columnist. Madison Awards are given in the spirit of James Madison, Fourth President of the United States and author of the Second Amendment.
For their contributions, Stephen Chapman and Cecil Adams are recognized for providing the pro-gun side of the gun control debate. Their voices are a crucial balance against the endless attacks by other members of the media against our Second Amendment Rights.
Our first winner, Stephen Chapman, is a member of the Creators Syndicate. His award winning article, "More guns and Streets Safer? Consider example of Florida", appeared in the January 29th issue of the Orlando Sentinel.
The article praises the effectiveness of lenient concealed weapons laws and deems the move toward better carry laws, "The most striking recent development in gun laws," even overshadowing the Clinton gun ban. Chapman states that, "Since 1987, 10 states have made concealed-weapon permits easy to get, bringing to 19 the number with such a policy. Several more are considering the idea."
Chapman points out the fact that gun control proponents mislead the public in their goal of preventing concealed carry laws around the nation and then he attacks their inaccuracies. He quotes Handgun Control Inc. claims that "Between 1987 -- the year Florida enacted its law -- and 1992, the violent crime rate rose 17.8 percent. Florida’s 1992 violent crime rate of 1,207.2 per 100,000 people is the highest in the nation for any state."
Chapman rebuts these claims by reminding his readers that, "Florida had more than its share of mayhem long before this law. Handgun Control doesn’t mention that, between 1987 and 1992, the violent crime rate for the county as a whole rose by 24 percent -- considerably faster than in the Sunshine State. During that period, the national murder rate increased by 12 percent nationally, but the Florida murder rate fell by 21 percent."
The trouble caused by Florida concealed carry holders is almost nonexistent according to Chapman. He writes, "More than 100,000 people have licenses to carry concealed handguns, but the abuses rare. By the end of 1993, only 17 licenses had been revoked because the licensee committed a crime with a firearm." He also believes that firearms are the, "the major reason the high-crime United States has a lower burglary rate than England. . ." due to the fear of being shot by a homeowner.
Chapman concludes that, "It may be the height of sanity to suppose that, if our police can’t protect us from criminals, we should insist on the right to protect ourselves.
Our second recipient is Cecil Adams, who writes "The Straight Dope" column for the Washington City Papers. His article responds to readers’ questions over a variety of topics. The February 17th column for which he won his James Madison award was in response to a reader asking what the Framers’ intent for the Second Amendment was and whether or not the Second Amendment applies today.
Adams starts out quickly by asserting that the Second Amendment is relevant today, "else why have a constitution?" He then moves on to the more involved question of what was our Framers’ intent for the Second Amendment.
"Historically, there have been two interpretations of the Second Amendment: the states’-rights argument and the individual-rights argument," writes Adams. He clearly favors the individual right because he states that, "A reasonable restatement of the amendment might go something like this: Since we as a nation have found it necessary to organize citizen militias to defend against tyranny and may be compelled to do so again, and since these militias are necessarily composed of volunteers supplying their own weapons, the right of individuals to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
He also laments the reluctance of the courts to settle the matter of protection against state infringement under the Fourteenth Amendment. Adams states that, "In almost every other aspect of law, the Bill of Rights has been broadly construed to restrain the states as well as the federal government. Few today would argue that states can abrogate the right to free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment."
Adams disputes the finding of the people intent on gutting the Second Amendment under the argument that the Framers did not foresee the scale of today’s urban violence. He responds to their claims by writing, "Maybe they didn’t, but so what? Civil liberties advocates don’t accept urban violence as an excuse to curtail other constitutional rights, such as the protection against unlawful search and seizure."
Adams maintains that the Framers, "would have objected to a blanket proscription of handguns, which they would have seen as legitimate weapons of self-defense, and arguably they would have opposed a ban on assault rifles, the AK-47 being to today’s oppressed what the long rifle was to those of 1776."
Thank you to both of our winning authors for helping to educate their readers on the good side of firearms as well as informing people about the U.S. Constitution and the validity of all of its Amendments.