Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, February 9, 1991 TAG: 9102110253
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Hyperbole? For that, look to the NRA's hysterical campaign last week against a bill that would have scheduled a referendum on whether Virginia should have a three-day waiting period for handgun purchases.
Besides full-page newspaper advertisements and commercials on radio and television, the NRA deluged its members with scare mail: "If they win, they will be back to fingerprint you, prohibit private sales, register your guns, and ban them."
Democrats, charged the NRA, had "secretly" planned the bill to "harass" gun owners. The legislature could and should have enacted the waiting period without going to voters. How secret could a statewide referendum be?
The fright tactics and bullying worked. Democrats from rural areas deserted the measure on the House floor, where it lost by a 55-42 vote. "The NRA," said Del. Richard Cranwell of Vinton, "ran a good campaign based on hate and fear." He added: "The NRA won the battle, but they lost the war. I'm not going to let this go."
That is a telling comment from a powerful legislator who, until this session, was considered the gun lobby's ally. The Vinton Democrat always had opposed gun controls. Two years ago, when the NRA was fighting legislation to require an investigation into gun purchasers' police records, Cranwell came to the rescue by devising a plan for an instant computerized check. No wait, no inconvenience.
Now the NRA cites this law as an alternative to stricter legislation. In the wake of its passage in 1989, the NRA made Cranwell its man of the month. Last week - because Cranwell favored putting a proposed three-day waiting period to a popular vote - an NRA lobbyist called him "probably the worst enemy we could have in 12 states." How's that for hyperbole?
Even if one accepts the gun lobby's rigid and faulty interpretation of the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms carries no guarantee of instant access to weapons. Time to make a thorough background check is only one reason for short delays in retail sales of handguns. The extra time also provides a cooling-off period that may deter someone from buying and using a gun in the heat of passion.
Police records abound with examples of such hot-eyed action. On Aug. 8, 1989, Michael Lee Bishop, 28, bought a .357 magnum at about 11 a.m. from a gun shop in Christiansburg and went looking for his wife, Crystal. He found her just after 5 p.m. at Radford Community Hospital, where she was visiting her sister. Bishop shot his wife, then turned the gun on himself.
The new state law wasn't yet in effect, but it probably wouldn't have prevented the purchase, even though Bishop's wife had charged him a year before with assaulting her. Had there been a waiting period, though, the murder-suicide might not have occurred.
(Three months after the slayings, Thomas G. Baker Jr. was elected to the House of Delegates from Pulaski, Radford and part of Montgomery County. On Monday, he voted against the waiting-period referendum.)
One reason, perhaps, the NRA fought the referendum so hard is that Virginia voters likely would have endorsed the three-day waiting period. Public-opinion polls consistently show a majority favoring not only delays but also strict gun controls. Those controls still would not prevent law-abiding people from acquiring weapons for sport or self-defense. The day will dawn when the gun lobby cries "wolf" but legislators won't come running.
by CNB