5/99 Talking Points: Gun Control Amendments to H.R. 2122
(June 17, 1999)
Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
* Mandatory “safety locks” on all guns sold. This provision will simply lead to the requirement that parents lock up their guns. But locking up one’s safety means that a gun will not be immediately usable in an emergency and will actually cost lives. The Wall Street Journal (4/23/99) noted how when Beretta tested a “Saf T Lok,” it caused 18 of 27 rounds to “totally malfunction.” And when Handgun Control’s chief attorney attempted to demonstrate the same trigger lock at an HCI-sponsored event, he found, to his embarrassment, that he was unable to disengage the lock.
* Banning imports of self-defense ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds. These clips gave the Korean merchants in Los Angeles the ability to fend off rioters in 1992 when the police were retreating from the riot-torn areas of the city. Make no mistake about the agenda here. A shotgun can pump more lead in less than five seconds, than a semi-automatic (with large magazine clip) can put out in a minute. If the anti-gunners succeed in banning these imports, expect that shotguns will be next on the list.
* Raising the legal age to 21 for buying a handgun from a private individual. This provision will overturn more than 200 years of American jurisprudence and will create an interesting paradox. A 20-year old soldier coming home from the army would go to jail if he purchases from his father the exact type of handgun that he’s been trained to use in the service.
* Banning juvenile possession of certain semiautomatic rifles. Like the provision before it, this amendment will do nothing to stop juvenile thugs from using guns. Rather, it will punish law-abiding kids that go target shooting with their parents, or in some cases, will punish those brave teenagers that have used their family semi-auto to kill attackers in the home. Laws should punish violent acts, not just the mere possession of an object that is protected by the 2nd Amendment.
Please vote “NO” on final passage of H.R. 2122. GOA will rate this vote.