Alphecca

Weekly Check on the Bias

In 1775, England's General Sir Thomas Gage attempted to disarm colonial patriots in the battles of Lexington and Concord. It resulted in "the shot heard round the world." Gage then promised the Boston Selectmen that if all citizens turn in their arms they would be permitted to leave with all their possessions. Most of them did, but they were prevented from leaving anyway. Indeed, Gage's breaking of his word helped spark the American Revolution and it was partly from the resulting outrage of firearms confiscation that many of the colonies specifically declared the right of their free men to bear arms. This right was later incorporated into what we now call The Bill of Rights.

Welcome to the September 13th edition of the Weekly Check on the Bias of media regarding firearms and the Second Amendment. The big news -- by now widely discussed -- was the forced confiscation of firearms from those law-abiding residents of New Orleans who chose to remain in town following Hurricane Katrina. These hardy souls have been at the mercy of roving gangs of looters breaking into homes to steal anything of value. As the New York Times calmly reported:

No civilians in New Orleans will be allowed to carry pistols, shotguns or other firearms, said P. Edwin Compass III, the superintendent of police. "Only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons," he said.

We've read the stories of National Guardsmen busting open doors to private residences, forcing evacuation and confiscating any firearms. That has, at the moment, stopped since it would be hard to justify in light of the fact that other residents are actually returning to their homes -- the ones not submerged in water. Still, this was a repulsive effort by Compass and others and Dave Kopel writes in Reason:

In the nearly two weeks since Hurricane Katrina, the government of New Orleans has devolved from its traditional status as an elective kleptocracy into something far more dangerous: an anarcho-tyranny that refuses to protect the public from criminals while preventing people from protecting themselves. At the orders of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, the New Orleans Police, the National Guard, the Oklahoma National Guard, and U.S. Marshals have begun breaking into homes at gunpoint, confiscating their lawfully-owned firearms, and evicting the residents...

[...]

In the rest of the city, some police officers abandoned their posts, while others joined the looting spree. For several days, the ones who stayed on the job did not act to stop the looting that was going on right in front of them. To the extent that any homes or businesses were saved, the saviors were the many good citizens of New Orleans who defended their families, homes, and businesses with their own firearms.

[...]

The good gun-owning citizens of New Orleans and the surrounding areas ought to be thanked for helping to save some of their city after Mayor Nagin, incoherent and weeping, had fled to Baton Rouge. Yet instead these citizens are being victimized by a new round of home invasions and looting, these ones government-organized, for the purpose of firearms confiscation.

Kopel then shows that while the Police Superintendent Compass is granted the right to "regulate" firearms during an emergency, he certainly doesn't have the right to prevent lawful ownership by violating the Louisiana Constitution which clearly enumerates the right of the people to keep arms.

Why was the confiscation not only illegal but also ill-advised? From Cox News Service:

For days after the storm, the several dozen people who did not evacuate from Algiers Point said they did not see any police or soldiers but did see gangs of intruders.

So they set up what might be the ultimate neighborhood watch.

At night, the balcony of a beautifully restored Victorian house built in 1871 served as a lookout point. "I had the right flank," said Vinnie Pervel. Sitting in a white rocking chair on the balcony, his neighbor, Gareth Stubbs, protected the left flank.

They were armed with an arsenal gathered from the neighborhood — a shotgun, pistols, a flare gun and a Vietnam-era AK-47. They were backed up by Gregg Harris, who lives in the house with Pervel, and Pervel's 74-year-old mother, Jennie, who lives across Pelican Street from her son and is known in Algiers Point as "Miss P."

Many nights, Miss P. had a .38-caliber pistol in one hand and rosary beads in the other.

[...]

There are gas lamps on the columned porch that stayed on during the storm and its aftermath. The militia rigged car headlights and a car battery on porches of nearby houses. Then they put empty cans beneath trees that had fallen across both ends of the block.

When someone approached in the darkness, "you could hear the cans rattle. Then we would hit the switch at the battery and light up the street," said Pervel. "We would yell, 'we're going to count three and if you don't identify yourself, we're going to start shooting.' "

They could hear people fleeing and never fired a shot.

Algiers Point sits a bit higher than much of New Orleans and the residents still have water, gas, and phone service. The Algiers "militia" states they will refuse to evacuate and will not turn in their guns.

Another story, this one from the Baltimore Sun:

For nearly two weeks, Patrick Pearson guarded his suburban neighborhood against the unknown. His arsenal consisted of orange cones, tiki torches and a rifle. He stopped anyone trying to gain entry. He slept little and ate less.

"I had to use every skill I had to keep these people safe," said Pearson, 45, a former Marine who lost 12 pounds in the chaotic week after the storm. But over the weekend, for a few hours, he let his guard down. The New Orleans Saints were playing their season opener, and he was going to watch.

[...]

Pearson's brief respite before the television is but one instance of the normality returning to New Orleans. A few bars and restaurants along Bourbon Street have opened for business. Several hotels are accepting guests. Joggers and dog walkers can be seen in the grass along levees that are drying out. The international airport is expected to resume limited commercial service today.

Electricity and running water have returned to some sections of the city, though many neighborhoods are still flooded and there is much work to be done before the city is functional again. The streets are littered with debris, and the air reeks of stagnation. Uprooted trees and fallen branches line the roads.

These people are staying, too. Good for all of them. Yes, there are folks whose homes are under water and need a place to stay and it makes sense for them to go to temporary shelters, but for others, if their homes are "livable" and they want to stay, they should be allowed to and most importantly, they must be allowed their constitutional right to protect and defend themselves.

That's the kind of toughness that built this country. Indeed, it's that refusal to give in to an oppressive government that helped America gain it's independence from England in the first place.

The one thing that struck me through all of this is that all the newspapers (meaning the biggies like the New York Times and the Washington Post) that reported on the mandatory gun confiscation never issued a single editorial decrying the violation of one of the pillars of the Bill of Rights and even Louisianna's own State Constitution. You can be sure that if it was any other enumerated right, such as free speech or voting rights, their op-eds would be shouting indignation in bold print.

There was other news this past week...

The Second Amendment Foundation commissioned the Zogby Poll to find out whether people think it better to control crime through gun control or through border control. The results speak for themselves:

By a three-to-one margin, American citizens think border control is far more important to national security and fighting crime than gun control, a nationwide Zogby survey has revealed.

The survey, commissioned by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), found that 70 percent of the respondents believe border control is more important, while only 23 percent favor more gun control. Seven percent of the respondents were undecided. The survey was conducted Sept. 6-7, by randomly contacting more than 1,150 households around the country. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.9 percent, Zogby said.

"An overwhelming majority of American citizens think it is far more important to stop the flood of illegal aliens into this country than it is to restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners," said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb. "Disarming American citizens is not now, and never has been the solution to violent crime, especially when it appears that a growing number of those violent crimes are being committed by people who are in this country illegally."

According to the Zogby survey, a majority of respondents in every sub-group -- including 60 percent or more in most groups -- says border control is more effective than gun control. Those most likely to agree include three-fourths or more of residents of rural areas, people with annual household income of $15,000- $34,999, high school graduates, and those with some college education, and four-fifths or more of Republicans, 18-29 year- olds, and Born-again Christians, the survey revealed.

People with household income less than $15,000 (38 percent) are more likely to support gun control, the survey said. Approximately one-third of Democrats, Hispanics, single adults, and residents of large cities agree, as do 28 percent each of college graduates and residents of the West region.

"Even those in categories that lean more favorably toward gun control are in the minority, according to the results of this survey," Gottlieb noted. "The results are pretty clear. Americans believe their constitutional right to bear arms should be protected, and that illegal immigration must be controlled, not the other way around."

Those are pretty impressive margins, even from constituents who might otherwise be expected to support more gun control. I think it shows that most folks realize it isn't the gun, it's the person misusing the gun that is the problem. Now granted, the poll was commissioned by SAF and I can't find the phrasing of the questions asked but STILL, margins such as that need to be taken into account by politicians, including President Bush, who might favor "open borders".

Back in August I first reported the story of ATF agents and Virginia police acting badly at gun shows. Now, the promoter may join several attendees in filing suit. From Crosswalk:

The owner of a gun show targeted by federal law enforcement for a half dozen undercover enforcement operations may join with some of his customers in filing a federal class action civil rights lawsuit against the agencies that participated in the operations.

[...]

"More people have had their rights violated at my shows than at Annette's show," Elliot said, referring to colleague Annette Gelles, who owns the Showmasters Gun Show, which was the target of another ATF Task Force operation last month.

"They've been pulled over when they left the building and had their guns taken away from them," Elliot continued. "In one case, we had a guy with a valid concealed-carry permit who had his gun confiscated. He had to go to ATF headquarters the next day to pick that gun back up."

As Cybercast News Service previously reported, Richmond and Henrico police officers, acting under instructions from ATF agents, conducted "residence checks," going to certain gun buyers' homes to confirm their residence information. Records obtained through another FOIA request of the Henrico County Police Department support the allegation that some officers shared confidential information about gun buyers with their relatives and, possibly, with neighbors.

"There are a whole lot of people now starting to speak up about things that went on and happened to them and some of the stuff that just wasn't right that ATF did, along with other law enforcement people," Elliot said. "Some are starting to talk and some don't want to talk."

The VSP documents also list 43 guns as "confiscated," a figure that Elliot questions.

"How many of those guns stayed confiscated and how many were actually returned to their rightful owners?" Elliot asked. "We know of at least three."

Attorney Richard Gardiner is an expert on federal firearms laws. He previously told Cybercast News Service that the behavior Elliot described would potentially rise to the level of civil rights violations.

"I think you would have an action against the state and local agents or officers for violation of your federal statutory rights," Gardiner said. "You can recover against individual federal agents for violation of your constitutional rights but not your statutory rights."

Elliot and Gelles are seeking co-plaintiffs for a likely lawsuit against all of the law enforcement agencies involved in the ATF Task Force.

Good! When government violates people's rights, they need to be taken to court so that it can never happen again. The ATF has since declared that it is, "...no longer in the residency checking business" but that's closing the barn door after the horses are out.

It will be interesting to see if those law-abiding citizens in New Orleans who had their firearms confiscated will also file suit. In an emergency, it is more important than ever that Americans believe that government will protect their rights, not infringe on them. Else, the powers that be will consider itself to have license to infringe more and more with each succeeding event.

What if they held a rebate and no one came? Smith and Wesson is finding that out. From the Charlotte Observer:

Smith & Wesson, trying to reduce firearms accidents and boost the gun maker's sales, is offering a $25 rebate to handgun buyers across the country who complete a safety course.

Few customers, though, seem to be taking the nation's oldest gun manufacturer up on its offer, judging from the company's affiliated dealers in Charlotte.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, formerly known as Handgun Control Inc., has historically called for increased safety training for gun owners. The group, however, criticized Smith & Wesson's offer as an attempt at image-polishing while the company and other gun manufacturers fight federal legislation that would require all gun owners be licensed and pass a safety course.

Springfield, Mass.-based Smith & Wesson is one of the world's largest manufacturers of handguns. It posted sales of $124 million in its most recent fiscal year.

Industry officials say a steady decline in firearms accidents for decades shows that mandated safety courses aren't necessary, and Americans don't need a license to exercise a constitutional right to bear arms.

As part of its "Protecting the Homefront" campaign, Smith & Wesson will send $25 to a customer who buys a Smith & Wesson firearm and submits proof that he or she completed a gun safety course postmarked by Sept. 30. The buyer also gets a baseball cap with the company logo.

Two things here. First, Smith & Wesson is discovering what many companies already know: Most consumers are too lazy to take advantage of rebates. That's why they advertise rebates as a "sale" device but require them to be mailed in with documentation, etc., etc. Rebates only work if they are on-the-spot and significant, such as with automakers. It's a way to put an item on sale without actually reducing the cost of it.

Secondly, the implication that folks don't want to learn gun safety is false. Many states require that permit holders take a safetly class so they already have. Many more gun owners have also taken mandatory hunter-safety classes that include safe gun handling. I'm willing to bet that if you polled gun owners, 4/5ths of them will have had safe gun handling instruction.

The Brady Bunch again reveal their ambition to require the licensing of all gun owners and no doubt universal firearm registration as well. The gun industry is correct in it's response: Rights are not priviledges and shouldn't need sanction by the state or federal government.

I'll be on Cam Edwards' NRA News this afternoon and until then, thanks so much for stopping by!

Posted by Jeff Soyer at September 13, 2005 09:30 AM