Riding in cars with guns
October 2002
by Glenn Pfeifer

Excerpt from the AP wire October 15, 2002

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush does not support the push for firearms "fingerprinting" that has grown from the unsolved Washington-area sniper shootings, because he is not sure of the technology's accuracy, a spokesman said Tuesday.

Besides, added White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, when it comes to new gun controls generally, "how many laws can we really have to stop crime, if people are determined in their heart to violate them no matter how many there are or what they say?"

A sniper has struck in the Washington area 11 times in the past 13 days, killing nine people and seriously wounding two others at random. The rifle attacks have revived interest in a national system for "fingerprinting" guns - requiring gun makers to file into a law-enforcement database the distinct markings that each gun leaves on a test-fired bullet casing. Police could then possibly use the recorded etchings to trace crime-scene slugs to the gun that fired them.

New York and Maryland are the only two states that currently require such ballistics data to be kept on all handguns made and sold in those states.

Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., and Rep. Robert Andrews, D-N.J., are among those in Congress trying to pass legislation creating a national system. The National Rifle Association and other gun-rights lobbyists oppose such a system, fearing it is one step down the path to a national database of gun owners.

______________

This story is just the latest in a long line of similar comments made by the Bush administration concerning commonsense gun laws and gun safety. I'm not sure when I read quotes like these (and they're in the papers pretty much every week), I should laugh or cry.

I guess if I read into Ari Fleischer's quote, we shouldn't even bother to have policemen, right? I mean, if psychos are going to break the law and kill people no matter what…why have laws against that?

What Ari neglects to mention is the fact that technology like the above-mentioned fingerprinting will actually HELP POLICE CATCH GUNMEN!! It's true that we will always have psychos who shoot their neighbors (maybe if we discouraged instead of embracing violence as a culture, there would be a few less, but that's here nor there for the purposes of this article). But what's also true is that there are measures we can take right now when we actually MANUFACTURE THE GUNS that make their USE IN KILLING more traceable, and we don't bother.

It's really quite scary that those we've entrusted with our highest political offices (I can't quite use the word elected here) have no interest in our safety. The NRA "fears" that we may actually have a national database of gun owners. Can someone let me know why this is bad?

Don't we have national databases for other things…like registered drivers? These may be statewide, not national, but the premise is the same. To buy a car, I have to follow rules. I need a license. I need to pass a SAFETY test to make sure I WON'T HURT ANYONE while driving. I need to renew my license, my registration for my vehicle (which, by the way carries a unique VIN so my car can always be traced by a number and an owner) and my auto insurance.

If I want a gun, I go down to the Sports Authority and buy one. In fact, they're right next to the roller blades and skateboards, so my kid can help me pick it out after we've fitted him for skates. That way, we can make sure he's able to use it too the next time a classmate pisses him off. Better yet, I probably need a license at the Sports Authority, so I'll just go online and use a fake ID and get it shipped to a PO box.

Maybe the sickening herd of egomaniacal, greedy, self-serving dicks we call our legislative branch can hide behind the 2nd amendment of our Constitution when discussing the 'right' to bear arms (as opposed to the 'privilege' of driving), but I have a hard time connecting this day and age with the one that our Constitution was written in. When the Constitution was written, our new government hadn't put a police network in place, wild animals (and displaced Native Americans) were a real danger, and I'm sure I'd own a rifle or two to protect my family. How does this basic need from the 18th Century translate into the need today to own and "collect" semiautomatic weapons, bullet-proof-vest-piercing bullets, and a firepower arsenal to rival the police department of a small town?

The best thing that could happen in this horrible "sniper" story would be for the killer(s) to be Al Queda supporters, so we can attach our "Anti-American Terrorist" label to them and feel safer at the gas pump. That way, we can continue to ignore the arcane and insane laws we have for gun control and forget again for a while (until the next shooting spree) that what this sniper is actually doing is very "American" indeed.

I love my country. I love the ideals it stands for. I love my family, too. I'd prefer if my leaders actually had families in mind instead of campaign donations when they looked at gun control. Shame on you Ari Fleischer. How can you sleep at night after comments like this one? Lick Bush in 2004.--gp fife

(Glenn Pfeifer is a volunteer staff writer for 2 Walls Webzine)