Nearly a decade ago, then-Congressman Tom Coburn joined Second Amendment advocates to successfully battle anti-gun provisions in Clinton-supported so-called "terrorism" legislation -- provisions that could have sent thousands of law-abiding gun owners and gun dealers to prison.

Now, Coburn is being attacked for that pro-gun position by anti-gun politician Kirk Humphreys, who is challenging him for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Don Nickles.

It is important to remember the history which surrounded this "terrorism" legislation. In 1994, President Clinton had just won two huge victories, getting Congress to pass the Brady Law and the Semi-auto Ban. But that "victory" was short-lived as angry, pro-gun Democrat voters crossed party lines in November of 1994 to shift the balance of power to the Republican Party.

Reeling, but still committed to controlling firearms, anti-gun Democrats in the House and Senate began a guerilla war, attaching anti-gun riders to supposedly popular bills—such as anti-terror legislation.

While some anti-gun legislation still passed as part of this legislation, pro-gun forces won some huge victories in defeating several anti-gun riders. The net result was that Tom Coburn was a leader in defeating enemies of the Second Amendment who tried to use the banner of "terrorism" to further their contemptible ends.

Let's look at the facts regarding the so-called terrorism legislation that passed in 1996:

* In its early form -- as H.R. 2768 -- section 204 of the package would have sent large numbers of gun dealers to prison because they "should have known" one of their thousands of customers would use one of their firearms in a "crime of violence." This provision alone could have eliminated gun dealers -- and thereby imposed a national gun ban.

* H.R. 2768 would have also:

1) ordered a study of "armor piercing bullets" designed to redefine that term in a way that would outlaw all ammunition (sec. 112); and

2) made it a crime to negligently sell a firearm to a person who turned out to be a member of a "terrorist organization" -- a term which has since been expansively defined in a way that could be applicable to GOA or the NRA (sec. 102).

* Even the conference report on the bill (S. 735) -- stripped by Coburn and his allies of the worst anti-gun provisions -- continued to contain some Clinton-supported anti-Second Amendment provisions, such as:

1) an increase in BATF pay by $40 million (sec. 816); and

2) an anti-hunter "study" designed to be a precursor for banning certain calibers of ammunition that are common among sportsmen and hunters (sec. 809).

Despite the passage of this terrorism bill in April, 1996, President Clinton's thirst for bigger government and more gun control was not quenched. In August of 1996, the House of Representatives took up another "terrorism" bill (the Aviation Security Act, H.R. 3953). This bill contained a taggants study, which Gun Owners had successfully lobbied to kill in the earlier terrorism legislation.

Listen to what pro-gun Democrat Harold Volkmer (MO) -- famous for having sponsored the McClure-Volkmer bill in the mid-1980s to stop many BATF abuses of gun owners -- had to say about this obnoxious bill:

I do not like it. I do not believe in taggants in black powder. I think this study brings us to where you do have taggants in black powder. That is where it leads us, right down that road. That is another reason to vote against [H.R. 3953]. [Congressional Record, August 2, 1996, p. H9883.]

By calling for a taggants study, HR 3953 was taking a shot at gun owners nationwide. GOA was joined by other pro-gun organizations in their conclusion that this study would be used as a precursor for putting "taggants" -- or chemical markers -- in all black and smokeless powder... thus, registering gun owners.

In Washington, this is what "studies" are used for. When Congress ordered a study on the Instant Check in the late 1980s -- as a way to temporarily kill the Brady bill -- anti-gunners were undeterred. They came back the next year using the study as "ammunition" to pass the waiting period.

Thus, H.R. 3953 was the first step towards registering gun owners, even while doing nothing to stop real terrorists. Listen to Volkmer again:

Why do you not have a good terrorism bill? Let us go after the terrorists. You do not go after one terrorist in this bill [H.R. 3953]. Not one. This bill will not stop one terrorist. While you are home all during August and having your fun, there will not be one act of terrorism stopped by this bill. [Ibid.]

Harold Volkmer was right. This Aviation Security Act did nothing to stop terrorism -- as the nation learned on September 11, 2001. Real aviation security would have involved giving the pilots guns.

Rep. Coburn was right to oppose this bill. And Gun Owners of America lauds him for upholding his oath of office and voting to protect the Constitution against additional infringements upon the rights of the people.