Congress vs. the Second Amendmentnby Jerry Woodruffn”A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right ofnthe people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”n—The Second AmendmentnWB^—–jTjjffnr iJ^rnii:!ni^T* nifln\ V. r 1n[^n’nYn1n%si.n1 [L/Jnff mn,— .n=ij»- Ji^^’j^nImiin^flUsr^MnWimJ^n^zL^^^^^SMKB^S^^^^^nn.^^”7n/ # ^nLike a recidivist criminal free to strike at will, the UnitednStates Congress slashed the Bill of Rights last year, tearingnmagazines. By a curious logic that only lawyers and politiciansncould take seriously, the bill defines ten-plus magazines asnthrough the widely ignored Second Amendment. I3y itself, the “Brearms.”nnarrow victory in the House of Representatives for the Fein- If you ever thought members of Congress were intelligent,nstein/Schumer ban on certain guns and high-capacity maga­ thoughtful, honest men and women who take seriously their rezinesnwas disturbing enough to gunowners. But if the debate sponsibility to fashion the laws that govern us, take a look at thenthat preceded the vote is any indication of the quality of people Congressional Record transcript of the debate on the bill. Itnwe send to Congress, all Americans—not just those who own shows that many members of Congress simply did not knownguns—are in serious trouble.nwhat they were talking about. Others—the smarter, cleverernThe legislation, sponsored by Representative Charles ones—pursued their antigun agenda based on fear, bigotry,nSchumer (D-NY), was H.R. 4296, a clone of Senator Diane and intimidation. Steeped in antigun prejudice and a profoundnFeinstein’s (D-CA) rights-stripping bill that passed the Senate disrespect for America’s people and traditions, many were dis­nin 1993. It was later merged into the infamous “Crime Bill.” honest enough to lie and distort the facts just to get their way.nExcept for guns already possessed, the bill strips Americans ofnthe right to own semiautomatic military look-alikes that havendetachable magazines and at least two of the following accessories;na folding stock, a pistol grip that “protrudes conspicuously,”na flash suppressor, a bayonet mount, and a grenadenlauncher.nMuch of the ignorance displayed was preposterous. Onenmember. Representative Jack Reed (D-RI), after braggingnabout his experience with weapons he attained during servicenin the Army, cited “portability” as a feature that makes militarynlook-alikes especially pernicious. Representative Michael Andrewsn(D-TX) said the ban was needed because it targetednUltimately the ban applies to more than 180 weapons. The “high-velocity weapons” (whatever those are), and Representa­nbill also bans semiautomatic military-style handguns like the tive Constance Morella (R-MD) condemned the banned gunsnMAC 10, as well as all gun magazines that have a capacity of because they “fire rapidly with ease”—an apparent attempt tonmore than ten rounds, except for attached .22 caliber tube contrast them with nonmilitary semiautomatics, which she evidentlynbelieves fire slowly with difficulty.n]erry Woodruff is president of the American Policy Institute and Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) suggested that be­nwas communications director for Buchanan for President. cause they “spray a large number of rounds,” the banned riflesn18/CHRONICLESnnn