The new Prohibition

May 18, 1:24 PMDenver Gun Rights ExaminerDan Bidstrup

Previous Next

13 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Denver Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

My oldest daughter patted my hand indulgently and said "Dad, I can assure you that nobody is going to come take your guns."  We were again discussing gun rights and she cannot fathom my trepidation about the current trend in our federal government.  I agree that the current legislation being considered doesn't empower the police to come confiscate our guns, but it does put in place a national permit system to oversee citizens rights to own a gun.  That is step one: make it an earned privilege to own a gun.  Step two is to raise the bar so high that practically nobody is clean enough or trained enough or sane enough to actually own one.  After the basic permit is in place and all guns registered, each time someone forgets to renew or the government agency adds a requirement like "successful completion of the FBI Academy firearms training protocol paid for by the permit holder" that many could not afford, the permit is yanked and the guns taken away. Eventually, the number of legal owners of firearms would be about the same as Mexico currently has, a few thousand.  That's a feasible scenario.

Several people who have left comments on my columns have averred that they will not give up their guns without resistance.  I fear that passing a law to fix the "gun show loophole" like the Lautenberg bill in the Senate or the Rush bill in the house will create a large, new class of criminals.  Most of the appointees by the Obama administration have an anti-gun pedigree.  The majority of Americans who care about the issue believe that this administration and a compliant congress will try to clamp down on gun ownership in the face of statistics that give lie to their stated motives. I see the huge jump not only in ammunition sales but also the number of guns being bought by first time buyers as a vote against further gun control, and a belief that congress will try to do it. 

Where do you come down on the issue?  Do you say "The duly elected representatives of the majority of Americans have said I must reach an unattainable level of perfection to own a gun, therefore I will obey the new law of the land and turn in my guns."  Or do you say "The duly elected representatives of the majority of Americans have overstepped the intentions of the founders of America and I will not obey an unconstitutional law"  knowing that at that point, the Supreme Court has not ruled on the law, and you are not on the Supreme Court. I suspect that millions of Americans will appeal to natural law, which predates the US Constitution.  Our rights come from God first, and include liberty and the right to self defense.  The US constitution is an attempt to codify and protect the natural rights of man.  I predict that millions of law-abiding citizens will quietly decide not to follow this law if it is passed, and will join the felons and uncaught criminals who already don't obey the existing laws.  This will erode respect for law overall among the most staunch supporters of the rule of law as provided by the US Constitution.  If the government over-reaches with national permitting of gun-owners, (not just concealed carry which is bad enough) we will see disobedience like what occurred during Prohibition. 

It took several years for the US to realize that they had created more damage to the country than they had possibly imagined like the rise in organized crime and the drop in respect for the rule of law among average Americans when they outlawed alcohol. People took it very personally when the law infringed on their personal freedom. The proponents promised that without the corroding influence of "demon rum" poverty would be erased, families would be re-united, and unemployment would go way down because now men would be fit for work and want to. It didn't happen, any more than it will happen that criminals will use fewer guns after Launtenberg than before.  Even if they have to drop back to knives and clubs because the cost of an illegal gun has gone up, it is OK because the victims have been disarmed too.  We would see the rate of violent crime begin to rise again in America after years of decline.

Frederic Rene Coudert Sr., was a Manhattan lawyer in the day, and he opposed prohibition stating his position strongly in an open letter in Time magazine of March 3, 1930: "The 18th Amendment does not represent a law. ... It is a piece of fanaticism. . . . Call out the Navy. . . . Put every citizen who violates the law into jail and have accommodations for 50 or 60 million. Then take the consequences of the government that does that of being swept out of existence." 

We currently have roughly 120 million gun owners in America.  How many would reject a law requiring them to volunteer to be vetted merely to own a gun, and submit to yearly inventory of their collection by the local police to assure the government that they hadn't added or sold any in the last 12 months?  Criminalizing a big chunk of your most law-abiding citizens is a sure recipe for societal disaster.

.