Hindsight from The New Gun Week Dec. 9, 1994 Nov. 8 Election Commentaries by Joseph P. Tartaro Executive Editor Surprisingly, there are more gunowners than one would imagine who have misjudged the size of the election victory on Nov. 8. Enough that it would seem worthwhile reviewing some of the things this election did and did not produce. First of all, let's consider what did not happen. Despite such a big role for gunowners in defeating many anti-gun Democrats, there is no guarantee that the "Crime Law" will be repealed–or even amended. That does not mean that some representatives and senators, particularly some of the new ones elected with a very clear pro-gun mandate, will not make an attempt to repeal the ban on some guns and large capacity magazines. It means that if such an attempt is made, it will not be an easy fight, and victory cannot be predicted, no matter how hard the major pro-gun groups support such an effort. Similarly, there is no likelihood that the Brady Law will be repealed. At best, one can only hope that the funding is provided which will accelerate the advent of the "instant check" provision. There are several reasons for this. There is no sure sign that all anti-gunners learned a lesson, anymore than they did after the defeat of Mary Sue Terry in Virginia and former Gov. James Florio in New Jersey in a previous "big message" election. Even after the election, there are a lot of local, state and federal officials promoting gun bans of all kinds. Witness, the attempt of the Columbus, OH, City Council to rush through a replacement gun ban just two weeks after the election. Remember, too, Rep. Charles Schumer (D-NY), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Sen. John Chafee (R-RI) made their big anti-gun push after Terry and Florio lost. They are all going to be back in the 104th Congress and they have said nothing to indicate that they will not keep pushing. Schumer and Feinstein got only part of what they wanted. Chafee didn't get his bill to ban all handguns in the last Congress, so he can be expected to file it again. Schumer's agenda still calls for passage of Brady II, which would require, among other things, that all handguns be licensed by the states along federal guidelines on a "needs" basis, that the licenses would have to be shown to buy handgun ammunition for the particular licensed guns, that the licenses would be renewable every two years at high cost, that people who own more than 20 firearms (rifles, shotguns and/or handguns) or 1,000 rounds of ammunition or one box of primers would have to pay for an expensive arsenal license and be subject to home inspection by the police. Brady II will be filed again, in part because Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), who was re-elected also, called for its passage during his election campaign. Anti-Gun Sickness The anti-gun sickness that grips some of the lawmakers, the media and a significant portion of the general public remains. The fever burns as strongly as ever in the brains of Schumer, Feinstein, Chafee, Kennedy and their many allies in and out of Congress. It is also as rampant as ever in the Clinton Administration, which has at least two more years to serve. Clinton himself, as well as Secretaries Lloyd Bentsen, Warren Christopher, Joycelyn Elders, and Donna Shalala, not to forget Attorney General Janet Reno, are all still in positions of executive power. Clinton is still surrounded by anti-gun advisors, including the noted hoplophobe and former congressman and federal judge now chief counsel to the President, Abner Mikva, who describes himself as a "cheerleader for big government." Clinton has already gone on record as saying that while he would work with Republican majorities, he will not compromise on the Brady Law or the gun and magazine ban. That means he would most likely veto any repeal of either. Sure the media and the commentators have been frequently quoted as saying that the gun issue played a big part in the election results which saw the shift in control of both houses of Congress to the Republicans. But they haven't given up on the anti-gun agenda, or incremental one world order. Finally, remember that the 54 Republicans who voted for the "Crime Bill" in the House in August are all coming back. Many of them were, and continue to be, anti-gunners. Many of these Republicans were willing to make deals with the White House that either helped assure, or guaranteed, their re-election. There will be new committee chairs, some of whom will be helpful, like Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) as chair of the House Judiciary's Subcommittee on Crime. However, Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL), who supported both the Brady Law and the "Crime Bill" will be chairman of the Judiciary. Not all the Republicans elected or re-elected on Nov. 8 are friends. just as not all Democrats are enemies. Close Races One should not consider some of the things that happened in the Nov. 8 election without also recalling the old saying about the kingdom that was lost for want of a horseshoe nail. There were a lot of close races, many of them decided by recounts. In some cases, the difference was less than 100 votes. Days after the election, several races were still in doubt, including those of anti-gunners Sen. Dianne Feinstein, and Reps. Gejdenson in Connecticut and Hinchey in New York. In these and many other races, pro-gun or less anti-gun challengers were defeated by a few votes. This suggests to me that while many gunowners were energized to participate and campaign aggressively, many others did not. We got into our current dangerous situation regarding firearms civil rights because many gunowners didn't take the situation seriously until after the passage of the waiting period and gun ban laws. Millions more have still not taken it seriously, or are part of that great group of Americans who will cede any right to a paternalistic government. When the numbers in elections are as close as they generally were in many races this year, it becomes apparent that the victors will be the ones who outhustle their opposition and get out the vote. Before Americans can feel secure with their rights again, they are going to have to outhustle and outvote the opposition in at least two more elections, 1996 and 1998. Given the closeness of so many races this year, one has to worry about whether this election was just a flash in the pan, or whether it is an indicator of a real revolution in American politics. Deadline Notice In recent months we at Gun Week have not been able to provide advance publicity for many rallies, demonstrations, public forums or shoots because the press release arrived too late for us to reach readers before the event. We remind you that we are always interested in helping to publicize such happenings but that we require at least three weeks advance notice. Our issues are dated Friday of each week, but close on the Friday two weeks earlier, and are mailed eight days before cover date. If you have an announcement for a special event, mail or fax it to us at the address or number which appear on Page 4 each week, so that it arrives not later than the Friday three full weeks before the date of your event. Correction In the Nov. 25 Hindsight column on the Nov. 8 election I said that no Democrat who voted against the "Crime Bill" was defeated. Actually, five were. They were Reps. Jolene Unsoeld (WA), Tom Barlow (KY), Larry LaRocco (ID), Ted Strickland (OH) and Bill Sarpalius (TX). However, they were all defeated by pro-gun Republicans. I should have said, "No Democrat who voted against the 'Crime Bill" was defeated because of the 'Crime Bill' vote." My thanks to those readers who caught the error and called it to my attention. The New Gun Week is a weekly publication of the Second Amendment Foundation. Hindsight is a weekly commentary written by SAF President and Gun Week Executive Editor Joseph P. Tartaro. For more information or to subscribe call 716-885-6408 Monday through Friday 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. EST, or inquire on Compuserve to John Krull, EDP manager - 75143,3674.