In Whose Interest?

"THIS IS A riot gun," says 29-year police veteran Robert "I'm the NRA" Kliesmet--a man with the law and order look written all over him. He brandishes his gun as he leans against his police car--a man who obviously revels in his machismo.

He has the look of authority, of someone who knows. Knows that people like himself make our streets safe. He's a fighter. And he'd like you to help him in his most recent battle to protect honest citizens. After all, he's the NRA. And the National Rifle Association is on another crusade.

Only this time, the goal is to make "federal gun law more enforceable."

Once again--in lobbying for the McClure-Volkmer "Firearms Owners Protection Act" which NRA pin-up Kliesmet is advertising--the NRA has demonstrated its knack at introducing ambiguity into a straightforward issue.

No matter how it's packaged, the NRA bill does absolutely nothing to make federal gun law more enforceable. In fact, it will make nightmarish any attempts by government--federal, state, or local--to prevent easily concealable handguns from getting into the hands of Hinckleys, lunatics, and criminals.

Despite the assurances of macho men such as Robert Kliesmet, the NRA is attempting to deregulate handguns to stimulate an otherwise tight firearms market. Their bill weakens a dozen provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968, passed after the assassinations of Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. Most important, it allows the sale of handguns to out-of-state residents, something presently illegal. Under this new law, someone desperate for a gun, or someone who wants to avoid having his record checked, can simply travel to another state.

The NRA claims that out-of-state sales are essential to sportsmen and hunters. To figure out their real motivation, however, we need only look at another provision of McClure-Volkmer. That provision would restrict law-enforcement authorities to one surprise inspection of gun dealers per year. So if you are a gun dealer, and your shop has already been inspected, feel free to relax your standards for the sake of sales; the NRA will do its part to be sure that the law protects your laxness. Clearly more than protecting honest sportsmen is at stake.

THERE IS, HOWEVER, one provision in the proposed gun decontrol bill which the NRA wants you to pay particular attention to. The mandatory sentencing provision is the cornerstone of the NRA mentality, as the bill shows.

Following the NRA's logic, an ideal gun law allows sportsmen, hunters, and honest citizens attempting to defend themselves easy access to guns. This protects the rights of folks like you and me. Criminals, on the other hand, should be punished heartily for any abuses they commit with handguns.

The NRA, it seems, is seriously committed to punishing those who use guns to violate the law. But then take a look at what the House Judiciary Committee has determined about the NRA's bill: the NRA mandatory sentencing provision "is unnecessary and, as drafted, it weakens and confuses current law." The mandatory sentencing aspects of the bill are far more effective as propaganda than as law enforcement; in 1985, President Reagan signed into law a bill mandating a 5-year prison term for those who possess firearms while committing a crime.

So just what is the NRA up to when it attaches a duplicate of an already existing law to a handgun decontrol bill? It seems transparent that the provision in question is there so that our centerfold, Robert Kliesment, can go on about how the NRA is making our streets safe for good honest citizens by locking criminals behind bars. Without this bogus provision, the NRA ad would have been impossible.

By centering the debate on the penalty issue, the NRA can divert our attention from the rest of the bill and its potential to increase gun-related crimes. The NRA must hide its true motivation and bury the fact that additional violent crime is the price which society must pay in exchange for easing restrictions on--and subsequently increasing the profits of--handgun dealers.

The mandatory sentencing provision clouds all this and increases the chances of the bill's passage.

It seems that the NRA's strategy is working well. Despite the fact that nearly every law enforcement organization has come out in opposition to McClure-Volkmer, the Senate passed it by a vote of 70-14, without hearings.

The NRA claims that its bill would make gun laws more enforceable. But if they really cared to see that gun laws are enforced, they would not consider surprise inspections of gun dealers as a violation of man's natural rights and would support a mandatory 15-day federal waiting period on all purchases of handguns. Such a provision would not prevent any "honest citizen" from defending himself and would not violate the rights of gun dealers. It would merely give an angry gun purchaser time to cool down and the government a chance to check the background of potential gun owners for mental illness and criminality.

House Judiciary Chairman Peter Rodino has introduced a bill mandating a waiting period. The NRA opposes it, claiming that the public would be better served by McClure-Volkmer. As the NRA applies pressure to representatives, let us hope that congressmen have the courage and vision to accept the NRA for what it is--a narrow special interest which seeks to benefit gun dealers and users with little regard for the public welfare.