-Caveat Lector-   <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">
</A> -Cui Bono?-

          William F. Buckley, Jr. - ON THE RIGHT
                 Tuesday  January, 18, 2000
------------------------------------------------------------
               WERE FORT SUMTER'S GUNS REGISTERED?

The quarrel over a Confederate flag flying over the statehouse
in Columbia, S.C., continues to engage the public. Why? Those
who feel that, emanating from that flag, is nostalgia for
slavery can't make their case persuasively. Nobody in South
Carolina believes in a return to slavery.

What else is signified? The Southern heritage, some answer
but heritage of what? The swastika is unmistakably the symbol
of Hitler and Hitlerism. The heritage felt so strongly by
defenders of the old flag has to do with the sense of a reserved
right of the citizen to secede from the government. And that
is profoundly relevant to current political controversy,
specifically the quarrel over gun control.

The partisans are extraordinarily, not to say disgustingly,
polarized. The anti-gun Citizens of America is circulating a
petition asking Congress to ordain a one-year limitation on
the ownership of guns of any kind. During that year, the
government would repay the citizen the value of his forfeited
guns(s). After that, ownership would be criminal.

Now that proposal, even though it isn't going to fly in America,
is an arguable position. But what is interesting in the literature
of the Citizens of America is less the proposal than the
accompanying rhetoric. "We're a single-issue organization,"
writes its director. "This campaign will not be apologetic, it
will not play fair, it will hit below the belt whenever the
opportunity presents itself, it will not take prisoners."

The other side can express itself with abandon. One anti-gun-control
organization's newsletter informs its readers, "I signed the
petition three times, once as Adolf Hitler, once as Benito
Mussolini and once as Pol Pot." That organization goes on to
publish a letter addressed to this columnist by John McClaughry,
who is president of the Ethan Allen Institute in Vermont, a
libertarian, pro-gun organization named after the revolutionary
hero who founded the Green Mountain Boys.

He wrote: "Am I correct that you are in favor of the government
keeping a record of guns sold, and to whom? How reassuring to
know that the next Craig Livingstone and Janet Reno will know
what firearms are in my possession. In 1685 James II promulgated
a ban on firearms ownership by the Irish. Is that where you are
heading? Have you no memory, man?"

I pleaded that the government's primary responsibility is to
protect the lives of its citizens. Therefore, the police need
such aids as are useful in tracking down aggressors. These
include fingerprints, Social Security numbers, passport numbers,
and yes, gun registration numbers. The balance between privacy
and protection is always changing -- see, e.g., airport
procedures. I concluded, "The time to start shooting at the
policeman is not when he is engaged in enforcing the law, but
when he is engaged in tyrannical practices."

Mr. McClaughry's reply is that of opponents of proposed measures
asking for full-scale gun registration. "Under present law,
Federal Firearms Licensees (gun dealers) are required to
retain a form, showing to whom a firearm was sold. This form
may be accessed by law enforcement authorities seeking to
establish the ownership path of a firearm used in a crime. The
government is barred by law from accessing these gun-sale
records unless the gun was used in a crime. The purpose of
this provision is to prevent the government from being able to
identify which citizens are armed."

This is Confederate-flag thinking. The thought behind it is that
citizens need to keep their guns in hiding from the government.
Why? Because the day might come when the citizens will want to
use those guns. Against whom? ... Against individual aggressors?
But obviously guns are kept, other than by sportsmen, for that
contingent reason. What is the objection to the government's
knowing that you have such a gun?

There is reason to conceal ownership of a gun where it is illegal
to own one (e.g., a handgun in New York City). On the other hand
and here is where the gun control people have made an insufficient
case for further legislation -- what are the motives of government
in seeking information on who has a gun, and what is its
manufacturer's registration number?

Those who want to make the case for the registration of all
weapons should demonstrate, if they can, how such records would
have prevented numerable crimes, or identified numerable
criminals who got away. Some of us grew up with guns -- I myself
own, I'd guess, seven or eight. They are a psychological comfort
against marauders.

But some people's attitude toward them has got to trace to
thinking of them as weapons against government tyranny. There
is no other way to account for the high temperature of the
principals.

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soap-boxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to