Hindsight from The New Gun Week
November 20, 2000

Regardless of Election Outcome
The Gun Debate Will Continue
by Joseph P. Tartaro, Executive Editor

Election Day 2000 has finally dawned.

Well, not quite dawned; the sun isn't up yet as this column is being written.

It will be hours, and possibly even days, before the final results of the presidential election are certain; most polling and knowledgeable political observers were predicting a very close race for president-and possibly even for control of both houses of Congress.

At this early hour, Dixville Notch, NH, the nation's traditional earliest voters, has already been reported as going heavily for Texas Gov. George W. Bush. I am hopeful that Page 1 of this issue, which will be written tomorrow-Nov. 8-will contain final results of the presidential and congressional races as well as the key state initiatives on guns, hunting and wildlife management.

But as I write this, there is the very real prospect that the final results, at least in the presidential race, may not be known when we go to press the day after the election. This is because of the closeness of the race and the fact that over a dozen states-particularly California, Oregon and Washington with a total of 72 electoral votes-rely so heavily on mail-in ballots which are valid if postmarked by election day. It is possible that these results will not be reported for several days. And then there is also the prospect of a delay in receiving and counting all the military ballots.

This year, once again, we are faced with the prospect that one major party candidate could win the popular election and lose the electoral vote that is the real determinant for who will occupy the White House next year. This possibility has also given special impetus to renewed calls for the abolition of the electoral vote system that is set forth in the Constitution. Advocates of this constitutional amendment believe the presidential election should be decided directly by a popular vote.

While this debate rises from time to time, it is unlikely such an amendment will be adopted any time soon unless the winner of the popular vote loses the electoral count. In that case, the losing party and probably most Americans will really demand that the system be changed. Without a groundswell of popular support, the electoral college issue will sink below the horizon again for at least another four years.

Predictions

Regardless of whether the Democrats or the Republicans win the White House and/or control of Congress, the gun issue will continue to be in play in the coming years. The debate over the right to keep and bear arms-especially on background checks for all firearms buyers at gun shows, on gun locks and so-called smart guns-is not going to go away.

Every major change in federal gun laws has usually happened not all at once, but over a period of years. In fact, the waiting period-background check law we call the Brady Act took over 30 years to become law. It is unlikely to be reversed and there will be continuing efforts to tweak it further. The Clinton-Gore Administration and many Democrats in Congress have already called for a re-imposition of a three-day waiting period. So, at minimum, this is an issue that will also surface.

Along with it we will probably also see a push for establishment of a federal system for building a digital registry of shell-casing data. Maryland and New York have already mandated such systems and it seems like handgun manufacturers would grudgingly support a federal system if for no other reason than to avoid coping with up to 50 different state requirements in the future.

The fact that such a system holds little real promise of providing a unique key to solving crimes involving guns and will prove very wasteful of government resources is beside the point. Most gun laws have proven pretty pointless-with the possible exception of right to carry laws.

Another issue that will be coming up again in just a few years is the ban on so-called assault weapons and large capacity magazines. Those provisions of the 1994 Crime Bill are supposed to sunset in 2004. Who's willing to take book on the betting on the outcome of that debate? When laws are enacted, they are seldom repealed-or allowed to sunset.

International Situation

A similar situation faces our neighbors to the north. Canadians will also be going to the polls this month-on Nov. 27. And the gun registry law passed by the Liberal Party government will be one of the issues. There are those Canadians who are hopeful that a new party-openly critical of that nation's gun law-will be elected and repeal it.

The Canadian law, which not only regulates handguns but also requires that all shotguns and rifles be registered, has already cost millions more than promised and is far from complete. It has already taken its toll on Canada's once vibrant hunting and outdoor tourism business and decimated the ranks of Canada's hunters. (The number of waterfowl hunters has dropped by almost a third in much of that country, and game and fish officials are already worried about soon not having enough hunters to help manage their vast wildlife resources.)

Keep your eye on the results of the Canadian elections at the end of this month. If a new government takes over, there is the prospect that the gun laws will be less restrictive, but not that they will be eliminated.

And, of course, US and Canadian gunowners alike face the 800-pound gorilla of gun control that looms in the United Nations. International talks, studies and negotiations on control of small arms are close to reaching critical mass. A major conference on small arms control has been scheduled for mid-2001 at the UN's New York City headquarters.

While Japan, Canada and Australia have played key roles in the global gun control effort, there is growing impetus now from South American countries like Brazil and Colombia.

Time for Whimsy

I don't mean to paint a gloomy picture. Nor do I foresee an end to traditional and constitutional American gun rights. But I do anticipate some changes. If Bush is elected, it will be better for gunowners than if Al Gore is elected. The same goes for GOP control of the Senate and the House as opposed to Democrat control. But, short of a miracle and control of both the White House and Congress by the Libertarian Party, we can expect the struggle for our gun rights to continue. The intensity may be different, but the struggle will not go away.

It is important that American civil liberties activists keep this in mind. No one should let down their guard and fold up their political tents as many did after the 1994 congressional elections. GOP or Democrat control, the need for vigilance and involvement will always persist.

As further assurance that our rights will continue to be in good hands, I give you the example of Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. John LaFalce (D-NY). Several issues back we printed a letter alleged to have come from Schumer in which he professed his dedication to the Second Amendment. When we printed that letter, we ran a disclaimer to say that we hadn't seen an authentic signed copy.

Since then, we have received several authentic copies, plus another from LaFalce to constituents. LaFalce has never voted against a gun control measure or for a gun rights bill. But he and Schumer profess a similar regard for your gun rights. It you need a chuckle early on election day, here it is:

"First, I want to assure you that I am fully committed to the protection of every citizen's Second Amendment right to bear arms," said Sen. Charles Schumer in various letters to constituents in 1999 and 2000.

"With respect to gun-related laws, I oppose any effort to repeal the Second Amendment to our Constitution, but will support reasonable legislation that has the primary purpose and principal effect of preventing or punishing gun-related crimes," Rep. John LaFalce wrote in various letters sent to constituents in 1999 and 2000.

---

The New Gun Week is published three times a month by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) on the 1st, 10th, and 20th. Hindsight is a commentary written by SAF President and Gun Week Executive Editor Joseph P. Tartaro. This commentary may be reprinted so long as credit is given to the author and the publication. For more information or to subscribe, write Gun Week, PO Box 488, Buffalo, NY 14209, or call 716-885-6408 Monday through Friday 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. EST, or inquire on Compuserve to John Krull, Production manager-JohnSAF@Compuserve.com or gunweeksaf@broadviewnet.net

Also, check out the New Gun Week at http://www.GunWeek.com