President Bush has come under flack from conservatives recently over his willingness to sign into law the so called “Assault Weapon Ban” that was initiated by former President Clinton but which is now coming up for renewal. He may well believe that this is not a battle he can afford to fight, since the new law will come into being right around the time of his re-election. After all, the very term “assault weapon” conjures up in the average American mind a picture of a particularly deadly, military-style “high-powered” weapons for which no honest citizen could ever have a legitimate use. Surely, it is a GOOD thing to rid our nation of such “nasty” weapons? Why then, should the president put his reelection in danger by caving in to the “gun-nut” lobby?

First of all, Americans should realize that the “assault” rifle ban is pure smoke and mirrors. To be considered an “assault” weapon, a rifle has to meet certain criteria; it has to have a pistol grip, flash suppressor, bayonet lug and replaceable magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds. Furthermore, it only has to have THREE of these features to be considered a “banned” weapon. So, if your rifle has a pistol grip, and replaceable magazine, but no flash suppressor or bayonet lug it is perfectly legal.

The simple fact that the media will not tell the average citizen is that in all that is important, an “assault” weapon is IDENTICAL to other perfectly legal rifles firing the same calibers and using the same magazines. For example, I have in my own gun-safe two such rifles; one a Ruger Mini-14 in .223 and a second-party clone that is the semi-automatic version of an AK-47 in 7.62 X 39mm, both bought legally AFTER the “assault weapon” ban. I even have 10+ capacity magazines for both rifles that are again, perfectly legal to own. Anyone over 21 (18 in some states) without a criminal history may purchase and own both kinds of rifle because they do not have flash suppressors or bayonet lugs. So what exactly is the “assault weapon” ban supposed to accomplish?

The “ban” has nothing to do whatsoever with the weapon itself other than how it looks. Since bayonets have been militarily obsolete since the War Between the States, having a lug at the end of the barrel that COULD hold one contributes nothing to its lethality, just its fierce-some look. In the same way, a flash suppressor is an attachment that helps hide the muzzle flash from enemy forces when being fired at night. Since this is not an eventuality that most armed citizens will face, what possible reason for banning it? Well, it does look pretty cool and makes the rifle look “meaner.”

The “assault weapon” ban does nothing whatsoever to keep particularly lethal firearms out of criminal hands. In fact, at the time the bill was passed ‘assault” weapons were used in less than 1% of all armed crime” But it does provide a precedent to outlaw a whole category of weapons based on such ridiculous criteria as their “looks” and therefore is an incremental step in outlawing ALL weapons. And let there be no mistake about the motivation or goals of the anti-gun crowd; they will never be satisfied until ALL weapons of ANY kind are removed from private hands. Anything they accomplish in the mean-time is just another step towards total confiscation.

There is little need here to go over the now well-known statistics that show that legally owned firearms are used millions of times a year in defense of home and family, even though one will not find these statistics on the nightly news. There is no need to remind most of our readers that criminals are far more likely to be shot by armed citizens than police or that states with concealed carry permits show a dramatic DECREASE in crime. And of course, no need to remind ourselves that every honest police officer will tell you he cannot protect you from crime; only investigate and hopefully arrest the criminal (less than 20% of the time).

Even so, many people will ask, “But why do you NEED to own such a weapon?” Just that fact that someone would think in such a way as to ask the question has serious implications. Well, Americans have a constitutional right to own and bear arms. Did you get that? It’s not about duck or deer hunting or even target shooting as pleasurable as many of us find these activities; it is about a constitutional right. The first amendment gives us the right to free speech and assembly, and the second gives us the right to bear arms. If you do not use a right, it becomes lost. Imagine how you would feel if someone tried to seriously question why you needed free speech or needed a free press, or freedom of religion. Why do the police really need a warrant? Do you really need privacy?

Furthermore, because all men under 65 are a legal part of the “unregulated militia” it is clearly the constitution’s intent that the average citizen be armed with the same type of weaponry being used by the regular army. In modern terms, that would mean a shoulder mounted, magazine fed, center-fired, semi-automatic weapon in a “military” caliber (the word “semi-automatic means that a weapon shoots every time the trigger is pulled; an “automatic” is where one pull of the trigger can “automatically” continue firing rounds until either the magazine is empty or the trigger is released. Even the army has given up on equipping every soldier with a full automatic weapon; the new M-16 A-2 has single shot, semi-automatic and three round burst; full automatic fire just wastes ammunition).

Unlike some people we know (yes we mean you, and you and especially YOU!), we here are not at all worried about the “jack-booted thugs” of the BATF or FBI coming for us in the night; things are bad in this country, but not yet THAT bad. But Washington, Madison, Jefferson and others were all agreed that an armed citizenry was the BEST insurance against Federal tyranny; granted, we hope and pray that such an eventuality never occurs-but that is why all of us carry SOME kind of insurance.

Mr. Bush is undoubtedly sincere, but wrong in his acquiescence on this issue. The American people need to be told the truth, straight up, that the current “assault weapon” ban is just a ploy to erode a basic constitutional right. Stand up them Mr. President, and millions of Americans will stand with you. But if you cave on this issue, a lot of supporters will believe they have been betrayed and will seek out third party candidates (or just stay home from the polls). All that will do is give the Whitehouse back to the Susan Sarandon and Martin Sheen crowd and haven’t we suffered enough?