I hope everyone contacts their Congress critters to let them know they should oppose this bone-headed bill. I would like to offer some suggestions to keep in mind when making that contact.
First, I don't think folks in DC give much care to "rights" except in an abstract way. Some do, but generally, that doesn't seem like a winning argument in Washington. Second, we know with as much certainty as possible that this ban accomplishes absolutely NOTHING that benefits the public, or even law enforcement officers. Passion is great, but facts matter, too. Make it clear that an AWB won't fly, because it isn't supported by any rational arguments.
It's probably time for me to download another FBI report, but the one I have from a few years ago shows that more LEOs get shot with their own weapons than with all AK variants. And get this: in the entire decade from 1993 to 2002, a whopping total of 24 LEOs were killed with .223 caliber rifles (5.56 is not considered distinct). Let me repeat - slightly more than two cops per year were killed in the entire nation with EBRs. More LEOs than that were fatally shot accidentally, for cryin' out loud (also a fact from the same 2002 FBI report, 29 to be exact). Another good tidbit is that more LEO's die from being struck by vehicles than are shot with rifles. Mind you, that's ALL rifles, including bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, or auto.
Also, the 1999 NIJ study (which was so badly misrepresented by our governor recently in Philadelphia, shame on him) makes this observation, among others that clearly do NOT support a law enforcement justification for an AWB:
Quote:
Given the limited use of the banned guns and magazines in
gun crimes, even the maximum theoretically achievable preventive effect
of the ban on outcomes such as the gun murder rate is almost certainly
too small to detect statistically because the congressionally mandated
timeframe for the study effectively limited postban data collection to, at
most, 24 months (and only 1 calendar year for annual data series).
|
That's the whole quote, including the part that doesn't help our case. Take that bold part, and quote that to the Congress critters.
I don't think I have crime data, but if anybody else does, please post it. That's more ammunition we can use against the gun nuts. Rifles of all types are used so infrequently in crimes, it just doesn't make sense to send up a new AWB.
By all means, contact your Reps, even if they're not on the judiciary committee, and let them know this is a dumb idea. We know it's just crass posturing, giving an appearance of doing something about crime, but actually doing nothing that has any effect. Make contact, reference the bill number, and use any quotes or data that strike your fancy to help get your point across. It doesn't have to be eloquent (although good grammar and accurate spelling are preferred), but it's worth a stamp to send it.
If your congress critter has "town hall" meetings, find one, and attend it if at all possible. Raise your hand, button-hole them after the session, whatever it takes to send the message. Actually, bringing it up in town hall meetings also serves the purpose of educating the other public folks who show up. Most of them probably don't know that more cops die from being run over by cars than are shot with these rifles.