Gun rights decision may sound the death knell for gun bans

By Steve Simpson
web posted October 29, 2001

It has long been an article of faith among gun controllers that the
Second Amendment merely protects the right of states to
maintain and arm militias. Proponents of this "collective rights"
argument contend that, while members of the National Guard
may possess guns, everyone else can be disarmed.

Gun control myths die hard, but this one may finally be on its last
legs. On October 16th, the collective rights theory suffered its
harshest blow yet when the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held in
U.S. v. Emerson that the Second Amendment was intended to
do precisely what it says: guarantee an individual right to bear
arms. After clarifying a widely misinterpreted Supreme Court
case from 1939, the court carefully analyzed the text and history
of the Second Amendment and concluded that the "collective
rights" position was untenable. It remains to be seen what the
ultimate impact of the decision will be, but it does not bode well
for future efforts to disarm Americans.

It is fitting that Emerson should be decided at a time when
Americans seem more concerned about defending themselves
than at anytime in recent memory. In the wake of the terrorist
attacks, Americans are buying guns in droves, and a recent
Zogby opinion poll indicates that a majority support the right to
carry guns for self defense.

It is also fitting that the decision should come during a year of
serious setbacks for gun controllers. They lost important allies in
the White House and Justice Department with the election of
George W. Bush. Efforts to cripple gun makers with liability
lawsuits have largely failed, with most of the suits being
dismissed. And gun control organizations are experiencing hard
times. The Million Mom March organizers closed their doors
and merged with Handgun Control, Inc. The new organization,
which changed its name to the "Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun
Violence" in an effort to soften its public image, recently laid off
nearly 20 per cent of its workers.

Of course, gun controllers are not retreating yet. They have
never been particularly sensitive to the harsh realities of life and it
is unlikely that recent events will change that. Indeed, at least one
organization has tried to spin the Emerson decision as a victory,
and the terrorist attacks seem to have left many gun controllers in
a state of denial. A Washington Post editorial recently wondered
how safe we would all be "surrounded by edgy people with guns
. . . but little or no weapons training." Luis Tolley, a director for
the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, commented to
the LA Times that "the last thing people want is to have to worry
about whether the guy sitting next to them at a Dodgers game is
carrying a gun."

In fact, it seems clear that the last thing Americans want these
days is to be caught unprepared to defend themselves in a crisis.
Compare the Los Angeles riots, where only armed Korean
grocers were able to defend themselves, with the aftermath of
Hurricane Andrew, where looting was virtually nonexistent
because South Floridians were armed to the teeth. In both cases,
the police were powerless to protect people. Americans seem to
have learned an important lesson from these events that gun
controllers refuse to face: in times of crisis, you are on your own.

Perhaps the gun controllers' refusal to face reality will finally
usher in their undoing. The aftermath of September 11th has seen
many politically-correct chickens come home to roost. The
impact of leftist mischief is being felt in our military and
intelligence communities, police forces, and most notably in
schools and on college campuses. While foolish policies are the
result of bad ideas that must be defeated on their merits (or lack
thereof), a necessary first step is to expose the fools who hold
them. It may seem ridiculous to argue that disarming Americans
is a sensible solution to crime after terrorists armed only with box
cutters were able to pull off the worst attack in American history.
But gun controllers -- bless their hearts -- are still trying, and we
can thank them for continuing to press the party line in the face of
all good sense.

While the Emerson decision is not likely to end efforts to disarm
Americans, it may very well mark the beginning of the end of
such efforts. For the sake of freedom, honesty, and good sense,
we can only hope that it does.

Steve Simpson is an attorney in Washington, D.C.  E-mail him at
ssimpson@ij.org.

Enter Stage Right - http://www.enterstageright.com