FREEDOM & JUSTICE

WHAT WE STAND FOR A PROPOSED PROGRESSIVE POSITION ON GUN CONTROL BY JIM ANDERSON We respect the right of American citizens to bear arms as set forth in the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We have absolutely no desire to outlaw any guns used for sport (such as hunting rifles) or for self-defense (such as legitimate handguns). We do not, however, believe ordinary citizens have a useful need to possess more destructive weapons of modern warfare--such as hand grenades, tanks, bazookas, mortars, land mines, rocket launchers, automatic pistols (such as MAC-10's) or assault rifles (such as AK-47's). Our society should not cross that dangerous “line in the sand.” We would also oppose using dynamite, plastic explosives, flame-throwers or nitroglycerin for serious pest control against birds, rodents, bats, raccoons, squirrels, or insects (including termites and carpenter ants). It is an exaggeration to say that reasonable legal controls over dangerous firearms is “the first step towards confiscating all your guns.” Common sense says that requiring you (as a driver) to have a driver's license is not “the first step” towards confiscating your car. And requiring you (as a pilot) to have a pilot's license is not “the first step” towards confiscating your airplane. And requiring you (as a manicurist) to have a beautician's license is not “the first step” towards confiscating your beauty shop. So, requiring you (as a gun-owner) to have a license for owning a highly-lethal weapon is not “the first step” towards confiscating all your guns, either. A sensible, limited monitoring of distribution of lethal firearms inside our society is a reasonable, minor step to protect our school-children, police officers, and unarmed friends, neighbors, and family from preventable injury or death. Everyone has heard the deceptive NRA slogan: “Guns don't kill people; people kill people.” Some have not bothered to think: “If the wrong people get the wrong guns, then more of us will get killed.”