Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Anti-Second Amendment Lobby Posing as "Gun Owners"

On Tuesday, March 18th - the day the historic Heller case was heard by the Supreme Court, USA Today decided to print this piece of trash.

Yet again an anti-Second Amendment talking head tries to pose as a "gun owner" and "expert" and fails miserably. Here's my response to Mr. Campbell, the so-called "expert"...

I don’t know Don Campbell, but I do know a front for the anti-gun lobby when I see one. Mr. Campbell claims “this is not an anti-gun diatribe”, but I’m sorry to break it to you Mr. Campbell – it is. It spouts just about every half-truth and misconception the anti-Second Amendment lobby can print, and it does so at light speed. Mr. Campbell claims he’s a gun owner – and therefore as a gun owner seeks to convey a sense of expertise to the reader. However, the number of factual errors he makes in the article is staggering. So staggering, in fact, I seriously question the last time he went gun shopping or went to a gun show.

Mr. Campbell bemoans the mythical “gun show loop-hole”. The reality is that background checks before purchase are required at every single show I’ve ever been to, and I’ve been to a lot of them. I’ve sat on both sides of the table as both a buyer and seller. The ONLY people who don’t require background checks are holders of Federal Firearms Licenses, and then the parties have to exchange information so that everyone’s bound books are kept up to date. I doubt Mr. Campbell even knows what a “bound book” is.

Mr. Campbell bemoans the power of the evil NRA. While the National Rifle Association is indeed a powerful lobby it is not a lobby in the back-room or underhanded sense Mr. Campbell attempts to convey. It is a grassroots organization of millions of hunters and shooters across this nation with one goal – to preserve our individual gun rights as affirmed by the Second Amendment.

Mr. Campbell advocates banning any semi-automatic firearm with a capacity of greater than six rounds. This once again leads me to question his background, because if he was any sort of firearms owner, he would be aware of the Civilian Marksmanship Program (formerly the Department of Civilian Marksmanship). They provide semi-automatic military surplus firearms to the American public to maintain marksmanship levels. The two primary rifles provided by these programs (with full government blessing) are the M1 Garand and the M1 Carbine. These are World War II vintage semi-automatic firearms. The Garand has an 8 round capacity, while the Carbine is magazine fed with generally 15 or 30 round magazines. The U.S. Government has been providing Americans with these weapons since the 1950’s – yet suddenly they’re too dangerous to own? Again, Mr. Campbell’s credibility is further strained.

Finally Mr. Campbell states “An improvised explosive device is a weapon of terror; so is a military-style assault rifle in a civilian's hands. It's time we treated them the same…” These same arguments were originally made by hunting enthusiast Jim Zumbo. He caught hell for it, but at least Mr. Zumbo had the courage to retract his ignorant comments because as he quickly learned, they were in error. “Military-style” assault rifles, as they are available to the general public, are semi-automatic rifles that use a cartridge with less punch than the majority of hunting rounds. They are also used in a tiny percentage of crimes. Again, if Mr. Campbell was a true firearms expert, he’d understand that fact rather than trying to slander law-abiding American citizens by putting them in the same bucket as suicide bombers.

Quite frankly I find Mr. Campbell’s article to be full of half-truths, misconceptions, lies, and outright slander. His attempts to pass himself off as a “firearm owner” and an expert on the subject ring very hollow, and I’m surprised that USA Today would stoop to publishing a piece with such blatant deficiencies.


Joe Blow said...

Good logic and writing here. Keep up the good work.

Fingolfen said...

Thanks!!! I haven't heard anything back from USA Today - nor do I expect to beyond the stock "your letter has been routed to the appropriate yadda yadda..."