Weapons ban meaningless
Thursday, January 6, 2005
To the Editor:
This is in response to Bernard "Ben" Krisko's letter, "Bring back the assault weapons ban."
1] The National Institute of Justice reported that the Assault Weapons Ban had no effect (i.e. none zip, nada, zilch) on crime. Additionally, it was reported that weapons covered by the AWB were used in less than 1 percent of crimes where firearms were used.
2] Josh Sugarman, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, acknowledged that "whether or not we renew the AWB will have little if any effect on crime."
Either the Constitution is "the supreme law of the land" or we live at the whim of mob rule, legislative over-reach, judicial fiat, and/or executive decree. The Second Amendment guarantees "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The definition of '"infringed" is the same today as it was in the 18th century. Exactly what part of "shall not be infringed" does Mr. Krisko not understand?
Instead of bringing back the AWB as Mr. Krisko suggests, why not go all the way and repeal the Second Amendment? And the First? And the Fourth? Let's just do away with the Constitution and Bill of Rights altogether. Yeah, that's the ticket!
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." -- Thomas Pynchon (Gravity's Rainbow)