Weapons as art at Shelburne Museum

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20101225/LIVING16/101225006/Weapons-as-art-at-Shelburne-Museum#pluckcomments

Saturday, December 25, 2010

Longtime firearms collector Terry Tyler recently donated his collection of historical Vermont firearms to the Shelburne Museum, which will put the weapons on display next year in an exhibit titled “Lock, Stock and Barrel: The Terry Tyler Collection of Vermont Firearms.”

The guns stand not only as a reflection of Vermont’s culture but of its creativity. Take a look at the evidence of craftsmanship and flourishes of artistic detail in the five firearms pictured on this page. The photos are accompanied by information provided by the Shelburne Museum and observations from Tyler, a former electrician and town constable from Dorset.

These guns and many others will be exhibited beginning May 15, 2011, and running through Oct. 30.

Pistol, Amasa Parker, Ludlow

Created in the 1850s, this pistol is made of brass, wood and steel. It is a .34 caliber underhammer pistol with a 1/3 octagon, 2/3 round barrel that is 11 ¾ inches long and marked P. & S. Remington.

Tyler says he acquired the gun from Dick Littlefield, a friend and gun dealer who has traveled to gun shows nationwide and is a member of the American Society of Arms Collectors.

“Its furniture is mostly brass,” Tyler said. “It’s bag-handle shape is not common in so large a pistol. Many small shop makers bought barrels from Remington but a good number did their own boring and drilling.”

Flintlock rifle, Adna Barrows, Castleton

Created in the mid-1800s, this rifle is made of brass, maple and wood. It is a .36 caliber flintlock rifle with maple stock and unique brass rectangular patch box.

“It’s a bit of an anachronism, as it was made long after the percussion action weapon came into general use,” Tyler said. “I would hazard a guess that it was specially ordered by a customer of Mr. Barrows. It’s the only flintlock I’ve seen him make.

The rectangular patch box is unusual, since most were round or oval, Tyler said.

Overall, “It’s craftmanship of the highest order.”

Revolver rifle, Elijah Jaquith, Brattleboro

Created in the 1830s, this revolver rifle is made of wood, brass and steel and is one of only seven known to survive, Tyler said. An early attempt to produce a repeater, it is a 7-shot underhammer rifle with plain sights, brass buttplate, loading lever and bayonet lug. It likely was carried by Jaquith when he served as a 3rd lieutenant officer in the 27th Regiment Vermont Militia.

Jaquith obtained a patent for this revolver rifle in 1938. “It is the only known revolver arm that has the cylinder access from where it pivots above the bore,” Tyler said. A semicircular detent allows the cylinder to be held in place, he said.

Target rifle, John Belknap, St. Johnsbury
This rifle is made of silver, steel, wood and ebony. It is a deluxe sidelock, half-stock target rifle, .40 caliber, 31 inches long.

“The Belknap rifle is one of the most beautifully crafted rifles that I have ever seen,” Tyler said. Belknap, who also built water wheels and water turbines, died tragically young when he was swept over the top of a dam, Tyler said. “He probably made less than a dozen rifles in his short life,” he said. “What a talent lost.”

Pistol, Robbins & Lawrence, Windsor

Created in the early 1850s, this pistol is made of steel, ivory and gold. It is a smaller model revolving hammer pepperbox repeating pistol with a five-barrel group .28 caliber, 3 ½ inches long. The frame, barrels, trigger and latch are engraved.

This pistol came in three distinct grades, Tyler said. One was sold in a cardboard box. Another came with accessories in polished cases. And a third, “presentation grade” pistol was heavily engraved, gold banded and came with an ivory grip, Tyler said.

This story appeared on page G1 of Saturday's Burlington Free Press

Moose hunt is on

http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/photos.aspx?id=559196

LANSING -- Governor Granholm has signed a law that will allow moose hunting in the Upper Peninsula.
A moose hunting advisory council will conduct a moose population study and make a recommendation on when the moose season will be, and how many licenses should be sold.
   
Earlier this week, a group of scientists tried to convince the governor that a moose hunting season in the U.P. would be a bad idea.
   
The bill cleared the legislature earlier this month.
   
It is estimated there are about eight-hundred to one-thousand moose in the U.P..

N.J. man goes from inmate to NRA celebrity as Gov. Christie commutes gun sentence

Published: Wednesday, December 22, 2010, 12:00 PM     Updated: Wednesday, December 22, 2010, 2:19 PM

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/12/nj_man_goes_from_inmate_to_nra.html

N.J. DOCBrian Aitken

TRENTON — No one told Brian Aitken why he was being removed from his prison tier on Monday night after dinner. He was transferred to the hospital wing and placed in a single cell by himself.

It wasn’t until the next morning that he found out Gov. Chris Christie had commuted his prison sentence for weapons charges. He was released from the Mid-State Correctional Facility Annex in Wrightstown after serving four months behind bars, far short of his full seven-year sentence.

"I’m home with my family now," Aitken said in a phone interview with New Jersey 101.5. "And it still hasn’t hit me."

Aitken, 27, became a cause celebre for gun advocates when he was arrested last year in Mount Laurel for possession of three handguns he legally purchased in Colorado but didn’t have a carry permit for in New Jersey.

Tuesday, the "Free Brian Aitken" Facebook page was overflowing with well-wishers. A radio host asked if he would write a book. And Aitken said he was looking forward to a "long-awaited date" with his fiance.

His release also drew national attention to Christie, who was widely praised by gun advocates.


"On behalf of the 4 million members of the National Rifle Association of America, I would like to thank Governor Christie for freeing Brian Aitken in time to spend the holiday with his family," Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement.

Christie has not detailed his decision, saying Tuesday, "I felt that justice required a commutation of his sentence."

Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll (R-Morris), an opponent of strict gun laws, had written to Christie urging Aitken’s release.

"The law is designed to protect the people against the possibility of harm," he said Tuesday. "How are the people benefited by throwing Brian Aitken into prison?"

Aitken had his handguns locked and unloaded in the trunk of his car, as required by law, but didn’t have a carry permit. When his mother became concerned for his well-being on Jan. 2, 2009, she called the police, who searched his car and found the handguns. He was charged with unlawful handgun possession — which has a three-year minimum sentence — as well as possession of hollow-point bullets and a large-capacity magazine.

New Jersey gun owners do not need a carry permit if they’re transporting their handgun in a vehicle while hunting or moving, among other select purposes. During Aitken’s trial the judge rejected his lawyer’s argument that he was moving when the guns were found in his trunk, saying there wasn’t enough evidence of that. Aitken is still pushing an appeal to overturn his conviction.

During Aitken’s trial the judge rejected his lawyer’s argument that he was moving when the guns were found in his trunk, saying there wasn’t enough evidence of that. Aitken is still pushing an appeal to overturn his conviction.

A spokesman for the Burlington County prosecutor’s office, which prosecuted Aitken, declined comment.

Christie did not say whether New Jersey’s gun laws are too strict. But some are hoping to push through changes.

"There’s a big problem with New Jersey gun laws," said Frank Fiamingo of Manahawkin, president of the New Jersey Second Amendment Society. "It’s next to impossible to get a carry permit."

Bryan Miller, project director for the anti-gun violence group Ceasefire NJ, said only a "tiny majority" of people actually want to loosen the state’s gun laws. He hopes others don’t see the governor’s decision on Aitken as a precendent for "a get-out-of-jail free card for breaking our gun laws."

A Christie spokesman said the governor had no plans to speak directly to Aitken, but Aitken had a message for the governor.

"Gov. Christie, thank you," he said on New Jersey 101.5. "Thank you for making my family’s Christmas wish come true."

Even though he’s grateful to the governor, Aitken said he won’t be hanging around.
"I will be getting out of New Jersey today," he said. "I will be spending the night outside of New Jersey. I’m very excited about that."
Staff writer Ginger Gibson contributed to this

Native Americans Designed First ''Deer Drives''by J. Wayne Fears
posted December 22, 2010

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_190978.asp


Driving deer is a popular method of hunting, especially in the late season. That's why I've included how to put on successful man-drives in my "How to Hunt Clear Cuts Successfully" and my "Deer Reference Guide" books, available at http://www.protoolindustries.net/categories/pocket-reference-guides. Although the early Europeans drove deer, I've often been asked how deer drives started in America. Much of what we use today in our tactical strategies to drive deer we have learned from the first Americans.

Native Americans designed their mass deer drives and tribal hunts around the terrain they were hunting. Most deer drives involved some kind of huge corral that enabled hunters to force the deer unsuspectingly down a gradually-narrowing passageway where other hunters awaited them. For instance, the Menomini tribe prepared for a deer drive by felling numerous trees to form a giant V, which ran for several miles through the woods. The men dropped the trees, so the trunks remained attached to the stumps but lay close to the ground, all extending in the same direction. When the drive began, a band of hunters concealed themselves at the apex of the V. Other hunters and sometimes the women and children gathered at the wide end of the V. Walking slowly and noisily forward, the hunters moved toward the bottleneck. The deer fled before them, but the drive had to be well-paced. If the hunters moved too fast, the deer became panicky and leapt over the fallen logs and out of the V. But when the hunters proceeded cautiously, the deer followed the line of least resistance inside the barricade and finally found themselves trapped.

The Iroquois tribe usually made their barricades with a brush fence 2- to 3-miles long. They started the drive by setting fire to the woods at the wide end of the corral. Parties of braves patrolled the sides of the V to prevent most of the deer from leaping over it. The deer were eventually driven to the apex, where other hunters took them.

Some western tribes did not use the long-corral system, however, but took advantage of the deer's fear of the smell of scorched buffalo hides. The day before such a drive, each member of the hunting party brought to the chief a piece of buffalo hide and a sharp stick on which to carry it. The chief scorched the skins. The next morning, he took the skins to a suitable spot about 5-miles windward (upwind) of the hunters' starting point. There he stuck each stick with its hide into the earth, in a line parallel to approaching braves before whom the deer were retreating. The chief, well-hidden from the deer, watched the deer come toward him. As the deer scented the scorched skins and turned to run away from them, the chief gave a signal and advanced. The hunters lay down, while the chief moved ahead, yelling and waving his arms. The frightened deer fled even more swiftly from this new danger, straight toward the hidden hunters, who raised to their knees and shot the deer with their bows and arrows as the deer came within range.

In some deer drives, the Native American hunters were fortunate enough to have a natural corral in their territory, such as a narrow gorge, into which they could drive the deer. If an area had a cliff with a projecting ledge a few feet below the brink of the cliff, a few braves wearing deerskins would stand on the end of the cliff, as other hunters drove the deer toward them. The fleeing deer, seeing what they thought were others of their kind in a safe place, raced for the cliff. The disguised hunters leapt to the ledge below, and the main body of deer charged toward the hunters dressed in deer skins, causing many of them to plunge over the cliff to their deaths.

Today we can't chop down large numbers of trees to create funnels and can't drive deer off cliffs or even want to do that. But I think our knowing how this hunting technique of man-drives has evolved is important. It's another part of the rich history of the sport of deer hunting.

Scientists challenge plans for U.P. moose hunt

By Todd A. Heywood | 12.21.10 | 8:57 am

 

http://michiganmessenger.com/44929/scientists-challenge-plans-for-u-p-moose-hunt

A group of biologists is asking Gov. Jennifer Granholm to veto legislation which would establish a commission to consider establishing a moose hunt in the state’s upper peninsula, according to an Associated Press report.

The plan was passed through both chambers of the legislature earlier this year with little debate. But a group of 14 scientists say the current moose population — estimated to be about 500 — is not able to handle a culling. They say the moose in the U.P. have a low birth rate and high mortality rate making the replenishment of the herd difficult.

Fifty-nine Moose were transplanted into the U.P. from Canada in the mid-80s. But because the U.P. weather conditions are at the very edge of the Moose’s preferable cold climate preferences, combined with an increase in white tail deer populations has made the herd growth very limited. Scientists say the white tail deer increase brings higher exposure for the moose to a brain worm which is fatal to the moose.
Granholm is expected to sign the legislation this week.

Does Michigan need a moose hunting season?

By ERIC SHARP
FREE PRESS OUTDOORS WRITER

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101219/SPORTS10/12190574/1058/Does-Michigan-need-moose-season&template=fullarticle

1,000-2,000 moose live in the Upper Peninsula, so they passed a bill requiring Michigan to consider instituting a moose hunting season.

Those numbers are a surprise to Brian Roell, the state moose expert, who said the last count showed 420 in the western UP. No one knows how many live in the eastern UP because the Department of Natural Resources and Environment hasn't tried to count them, but it's nowhere near 500.

"I don't know where they're getting those numbers," said Roell, who works out of the DNRE's Marquette office. "Our last count in 2009 was about 420 moose in the western UP. We don't have a count for the eastern UP, but we estimated the total (UP) population at 500-600."

This latest bit of legislative inanity is why the people of Michigan passed Proposal G 15 years ago, to ensure that such decisions are made based on principles of scientific game management rather than the short-term interests of politicians -- or shortsighted hunters, for that matter.

The Legislature gets to decide which animals may be legally hunted in Michigan, which is what that body did last week when it added moose to the list. But the more important question -- if they should be hunted -- is left up to the Natural Resources Commission.
The NRC has shown a great deal of common sense and guts in dealing with thorny issues such as shutting down baiting in the Lower Peninsula and mandating antler-point restrictions in the UP. Those decisions weren't popular, but they were the right ones at the time.

The DNRE's original moose plan was "2,000 by 2000," and had the moose population reached the 2,000 mark by that year we'd probably have a limited lottery moose hunt today, much like the limited lottery elk hunt in the Lower Peninsula.

But moose numbers are lagging behind projections, perhaps because of wolf predation, perhaps because of habitat and disease problems, or maybe a combination of factors we don't understand yet.

Whatever the reason, there's no reason to hunt Michigan moose until they triple their numbers.

Too cold: I'm beginning to think this might be the first deer season in 20 years that ends without my putting venison in the freezer. A few years ago I began my own version of quality deer management by passing on smaller bucks, and so far this year the bucks I've had close enough to stick an arrow in didn't make the cut.
It might also end as a disappointing season for the DNRE. A week of brutal winter weather chased a lot of muzzleloader and archery hunters out of the woods, and with Christmas on the horizon it might be a tough time to get many to go back.

"I have a doe tag left, but if I'm going to fill it, it will have to be this week," Jerry Mille of Saginaw said as he shopped for broadheads at Jay's Sporting Goods store in Gaylord. "I can hunt through Saturday night, but we have family arriving on Monday and I promised my wife I'd be home Sunday to help her get ready."

New director: Because I've written about the DNRE for 21 years, several people called to ask what I knew about Rodney Stokes, the career bureaucrat who has been named director.

Mostly I remember that he allowed a policy change in 1993 that let energy producers hoodwink Michigan out of millions of dollars in royalties from oil and gas produced on state-owned land. And a Free Press story in 2005 named him among the highest-paid state employees who retired with government pensions and then were rehired to work for the same agency.

I put in a request for an interview with Stokes, but he left on vacation Friday and won't be back until after Jan. 1.

I'm convinced that Stokes' appointment is part of a well-thought-out plan by our new governor, Rick Snyder, to make it easier for businesses to get permits for things they might not have been able to do before.

In 1993, the Michigan Oil and Gas Association asked for changes in the way producers were allowed to deduct post-production costs from the royalty they paid to the state of Michigan.

Stokes, then head of the DNRE's real-estate division, accepted MOGA's proposal without protest or comment. Post-production costs that had run about 10% of the royalty suddenly increased to 45%. In some months, instead of getting a royalty check for a well that produced gas worth tens of thousands of dollars, the oil producers sent the state a bill (although those bills weren't paid).

Critics said the change cost the DNRE at least $10 million. Stokes later said that Gov. John Engler and DNRE director Rollie Harmes both approved the proposed changes in advance but used him as a fall guy.

But what he hasn't explained is why he agreed to something like that in the first place, no matter who wanted it done.

Contact Eric Sharp: 313-222-2511 or esharp@freepress.com . Read more in his outdoors blog at freep.com/outdoorsblog

Overhaul of deer regulations called a victory for elite hunters

By Brett Prettyman

The Salt Lake Tribune

Published: December 19, 2010 11:14PM
Updated: December 19, 2010 11:36PM

 

The moment, critics say, represents everything that’s wrong with the way Utah sets its wildlife management policy.

 

Byron Bateman, president of the powerful lobbying group Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, had just finished speaking before the Utah Wildlife Board as it pondered the state’s most dramatic changes to its deer-hunting laws in two decades. Bateman then walked up to Jim Karpowitz, director of the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, and handed him a check for $391,000.

Later that day, the board passed the sweeping overhaul, regulations that were largely crafted and promoted by Bateman’s SFW. The changes, which go into effect in 2012, will reduce the number of deer-hunting permits by at least 13,000 annually and dramatically increase the cost of a general-season hunting tag in Utah.

Critics charge that opportunity for the average hunter is being lost at the expense of the well-heeled, who are more interested in trophy animals and believe these new laws are the best way to produce more. And everyone, beginning with the DWR’s top big-game biologist, agrees the changes do nothing to address the plight of the state’s dwindling deer herds.

The money Bateman paid Karpowitz was the state’s share of money that SFW collected auctioning conservation hunting tags, and groups commonly do present checks at Wildlife Board meetings. Nevertheless, for many hunters watching the handover, it was validation that special-interest groups have the Wildlife Board’s undivided attention and not always for the right reasons.

“That didn’t do much to help public perception,” acknowledged Rick Woodard, chairman of the Utah Wildlife Board. “But it was money due to the DWR and had nothing to do with the vote. It was done in poor judgment.”

“It doesn’t matter what the money was for,” said Bart Hansen, a representative of the group Utah Wildlife Cooperative, which opposed the changes SFW promoted. “The timing was intentional.”

The new regulations, which passed the board by a 4-to-2 vote, not only restrict the number of permits but change the way the state is divided for hunting from the five current regions into 29 smaller units. The buck-to-doe ratio that biologists target as they manage the herds was changed as well, from 15 per 100 to 18 per 100.

That means hunters may see more bucks, according to Anis Aoude, DWR’s big-game coordinator. “But it won’t help the population overall,” he said.

“We did what was best for the resource, for the deer,” Bateman said. “The DWR manages every aspect of the deer but the number of people hunting on each unit. We can’t expect the hunters to spread out evenly over five regions. This won’t fix the herds, but it could be a good start.”

Bateman is proud of the work SFW does on behalf of wildlife conservation and said he is unsure how the latest discussion became an opportunity-vs.-trophy debate.

“People always attack what we try to do,” he said, noting the check presentation was done to demonstrate SFW was fulfilling its commitment under the conservation permit program and, acknowledging the timing, said he had a flight to catch later.

“We are an easy group to target, and we get accused of a lot of things,” Bateman said. “We stand up for the resource; that is our mission.”

The Utah Wildlife Cooperative’s Hansen has a different take, saying the new regulations risk discouraging existing hunters and make it difficult for youth to get involved in the sport.

“There isn’t one anti-hunting group out there that could come up with a way to eliminate 13,000 permits like SFW just did,” Hansen said.

Dennis Austin, a retired 30-year DWR biologist and author of Mule Deer: A Handbook for Utah Hunters and Landowners, said the current system does indeed give special-interest groups a lot of power.

“The people who go to the meetings really want to say something, and they are often listened to,” he said.

And Karpowitz, the DWR director, agrees.

“The people who get involved and speak up are the ones that are heard, and decisions usually go their way. I have seen the board consistently try to do what they think the majority of the public wants,” Karpowitz said.

Karpowitz notes that, according to Utah law, the Wildlife Board’s job includes weighing the social and economic values of wildlife, not just managing the biology.

“Throughout this whole process I’ve been reminding the board and the public that how we hunt bucks in Utah is now very much a social issue,” he said. “Our job as the wildlife agency is easier when we only have to focus on the biology and science end of it.”

For Hansen, “social” means special interests. He wants to see the system changed and is willing to become the very thing he despises to make it happen.

The Utah Wildlife Cooperative “is going to set up as a nonprofit so we can be more involved in the political process of picking the wildlife board members and try and make some changes with the ... system,” he said. “There are too many hunters out there who disagree with SFW but aren’t involved enough to know what is going on. We need to speak for them.”

brettp@sltrib.com

—

Review • What is Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife?

R No group is more special interest when it comes to wildlife and, specifically, big game in Utah than SFW.

Founded in 1993, the group bills itself as a nonprofit wildlife conservation organization interested in preserving and increasing healthy, populations of wildlife throughout the western United States. If there is a meeting going on at the city, county, region or state level regarding big game, chances are there is an SFW representative in the room.

While the group has put wildlife interests on the political map, it has done so by attracting what can best be described as hard-core big game hunters who spend serious money and serious time chasing deer, elk, bighorn sheep, mountain goat, pronghorn and moose. One Utah elk permit was recently auctioned for $70,000 at an SFW event, according to the group’s website.

So-called “average hunters,”perhaps described as folks who just want to be able to hunt big game each year and couldn’t care less about bagging trophy bucks for the wall, are largely absent from the organization.

—

Results from a 2008 poll of deer hunters by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

75 percent of respondents said “getting away from it all” was the main reason they hunt mule deer. “Being with friends” was second at 73 percent and “being close to nature” was third at 70 percent. “Harvesting a large buck” was 10th on the list at 53 percent, and “harvesting any buck” was 17th at 25 percent.

74 percent of the participants said they would be “willing to accept additional restrictions to manage for bigger bucks.”

49 percent of all respondents were “dissatisfied” with the number of bucks they were spotting in the woods.

51 percent were “dissatisfied” with the size of the bucks — more specifically their antlers — they saw.

55 percent were satisfied with the quality of the hunt.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50889688-76/wildlife-deer-percent-utah.html.csp?page=2

BATFE Requests “Emergency” Authority To Track Semi-Automatic Rifle Sales

Saturday, 18 December 2010 08:09 NRA-ILA

 

http://www.rightsidenews.com/2010121812370/us/homeland-security/batfe-requests-emergency-authority-to-track-semi-automatic-rifle-sales.html

 

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has proposed that it be given emergency authority for six months, beginning January 5, to require about 8,500 firearms dealers along the border with Mexico “to alert authorities when they sell within five consecutive business days two or more semiautomatic rifles greater than .22 caliber with detachable magazines.”  A Washington Post story reporting on the BATFE proposal described that definition as being applicable to “so-called assault weapons,” but it would also apply to many rifles that have never been labeled with that term.

The reporting requirement will apparently be imposed under the “authority” the BATFE has used in the past to demand reporting of other types of transactions from certain limited groups of dealers over the past 10 years, but the new proposal is far broader than any previous use of this authority.  Of course, there's no law today that prevents dealers from reporting suspicious transactions (or attempted transactions) to the BATFE, and dealers often do so. The BATFE is also free to inspect dealers' sales records—either for annual compliance inspections or during a criminal investigation.

NRA-ILA’s chief lobbyist, Chris Cox, denounced the attempt to establish a registry of Americans who purchase semi-automatic rifles that gun control supporters ultimately want to see banned. "This administration does not have the guts to build a wall, but they do have the audacity to blame and register gun owners for Mexico's problems," Cox told the Post. "NRA supports legitimate efforts to stop criminal activity, but we will not stand idle while our Second Amendment is sacrificed for politics."

The Post says “The plan by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives revives a proposal that has languished at the Justice Department and in the Obama administration for several months,” and that the gist of the plan was proposed by Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) last year. It its August 2009 Blueprint for Federal Action on Guns, MAIG indeed proposed that “ATF should identify the long guns most linked to crime and require dealers to report multiple sales of such guns.”

The idea must have appealed to the BATFE, because in June of this year Congress’ Government Accountability Office released a report noting that BATFE officials had claimed that U.S. efforts to stop the smuggling of firearms to Mexico are hindered by “a lack of required background checks for private firearms sales, and limitations on reporting requirements for multiple sales.”

Curiously, in September, a draft of the Department of Justice’s Inspector General’s Office’s unfavorable review of BATFE’s Project Gunrunner, established to combat the trafficking of firearms to Mexico, didn’t mention multiple sales at all. But the final version of the review, released in November, mentions “multiple sales” 43 times and says “the lack of a reporting requirement for multiple sales of long guns – which have become the cartels’ weapons of choice – hinders ATF’s ability to disrupt the flow of illegal weapons into Mexico.”

Whether BATFE intends its plan as another expansion of its oft-criticized firearm sales record tracing empire, or to lay the groundwork for legislation or regulations restricting “assault weapon” sales, or to fatten the files the agency keeps at its National Tracing Center in West Virginia remains to be seen. And the legality of requiring sales reports on any long guns is also in doubt. When the Congress specifically imposed multiple sales reporting on handguns only, it implicitly stated its intention that the same requirement not apply to sales of long guns.

However, it is crystal clear that some in the Obama Administration agree with those who believe the answer to crime is always more gun control. In September, MAIG blamed crime in states that have “strong” gun laws, on states that don’t have the same laws. And ever since President Obama took office, gun control supporters have been blaming Mexico’s crime problem on America’s gun laws.

The fact that Mexico’s multi-billion dollar drug cartels have machine guns, rocket launchers, grenades, and other potent weaponry you cannot buy in the United States is, to gun control supporters, irrelevant. The fact that most of the cartels’ guns have never been on this side of the U.S. border is, as far as they are concerned, a trifling inconvenience. The fact that the cartels will never have enough “assault weapons” or any other guns from the U.S. to hand out to all the Mexican policemen, soldiers and politicians on their payrolls, is, in their view, an unimportant detail.  And the fact that the murder rate in the United States is at a 45-year low, while crime in Mexico is through the roof (the murder rate in Juarez is 115 times higher than in El Paso) is, they would certainly say, a contradiction best ignored.

To read the BATFE's Federal Register notice about the plan, and for information on how to send your comments, click here (http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-31761.pdf).  Comments about the proposal will be accepted for two months; if you choose to comment, please state your firm but polite opposition to the plan.

Needless to say, the NRA will not only comment, but take whatever other action is appropriate to block this sweeping expansion of federal recordkeeping on gun owners.  Stay tuned

Copyright 2010, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030    800-392-8683
Contact Us | Privacy & Security Policy