The right to bear cannons   During the recent national debate on possible gun-purchasing restrictions and requirements for safety trigger locks, gun advocates made their usual squawk that their second amendment rights were being violated -- or being threatened, or at risk of someday being threatened or violated. It was a fuzzy argument, but this much was clear: They felt that they're being clearly persecuted by Washington politicians and "the liberal media." But if anything, Congress and the press have coddled the gun lobby to a remarkable degree; consider the events surrounding the May 3 release of the Waxman / Blagojevich report on .50 caliber weapons.

Rep. Rod Blagojevich (D - Illinois) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D - California) asked the GAO to investigate "long-range sniper weapons" -- rifle- cannons that can rip through inches of steel or concrete as if they were flimsy cardboard. Even more than a mile distant, a .50 caliber bullet creates the damage of a point-blank hit by a powerful .44 Magnum. It can easily shoot down a helicopter with reinforced armor, or likewise an airplane four miles in the air. Compared to a 60mm mortar round, a single bullet can blow completely through six wood frame houses. And because they're semi-automatic, almost a dozen of these huge shells can be fired rapidly.

The GAO researched both the availability of the guns and the availability of its ammo. In their own white paper, the Congressmen summarized what was found:

Although long-range fifty caliber weapons have tremendous destructive force, they are regulated under federal law as "long guns." This means their purchase and ownership are given the least scrutiny of any firearm. Not only are fifty caliber weapons the most powerful firearms not currently regulated ... but purchasers and users of fifty caliber rifles are not required to meet the federal requirements even for handgun owners. As a result, an 18-year old high school senior with a few thousand dollars and a valid state driver's license can emerge from a gun shop with one of the premier military rifles ever made. .... The GAO investigators found that since the end of the Gulf War thousands of long-range fifty caliber sniper weapons have been sold in the domestic civilian market.

Who's buying these obscenely powerful weapons -- and why? To no one's surprise, the guns are a big favorite among terrorists, drug trafficking cartels, religious doomsday cults, and survivalists. Other proud owners include a mentally-ill man who killed a cop answering a domestic disturbance call, anti-Castro hardliners allegedly plotting to shoot down his plane, and a Montana survivalist cult found with ten of the guns stashed in their underground bunkers. And reversing a trend, the weapon is being smuggled out of the country; not long ago, members of an international drug cartel had a shoot-out in Mexico with a .50 caliber originally purchased in Wyoming.

These weapons also appeal to a jaded gun-buying public seeking ever- more exotic firearms; an Internet search easily found a .50 caliber rifle promoted as a door prize at the 1998 Valley Forge gun and knife show. At the same time, gun makers are eager to push the big weapons because they've found their regular market saturated -- even the most ardent gun collectors must have some limits on their personal arsenals. According to another report, "One Shot, One Kill," by the Violence Policy Center, the proliferation of sniper weapons is one of the few growth areas that exist for small-arms makers.

Another part of the appeal is the widespread assumption that the guns will be someday made illegal. The GAO undercover investigators found many of the gun dealers urging them to buy their weapons soon. One seller told an investigator, "It's only a matter of time before someone lets a round go on a range that travels so far, it hits a school bus full of kids. The government will definitely ban .50 calibers. The gun is just too powerful."

But most shocking is evidence that the industry intentionally markets the .50-caliber guns to disturbed individuals. Via books and videos that glorify snipers and killing humans such as "Stalk and Kill: The Sniper Experience" and "Marine Sniper: 93 Confirmed Kills," the guns are promoted to those with sick and murderous fantasies. Undercover GAO investigators found gun dealers eager to pander to paranoid delusions:

Agent:	Okay. Um, and so you say they'll go up through six inches of steel -- they'll penetrate...
Dealer:	Hm mmm.
Agent:	... at a thousand yards?
Dealer:	At a 45 degree angle at a thousand yards.
Agent:	Okay. So for sure then they'd go through an armored limousine?
Dealer:	Oh, yeah. (laughing)
Agent:	No question about that, right?
Dealer:	No question, fifty will go through any of it...We've played with stuff. I go through four inches, five inches of steel up here easy.
...
Agent:	Yeah, because, I mean, it's very important for me to get this, because there's going to be some day when I am going to need this ammunition, because I'm going to be -- I'm going to need to defeat an armored-type vehicle someday, I know that...
Dealer:	Well, then, when them cattle carts come running down your drive, you'd better be able to stop it. ["Cattle carts" are slang for the heavily-armored tanks used by the ATF at the Waco compound of David Koresh]
Agent:	Exactly, but you know, you can think who drives in armored limousines, that's why I'm going to need it someday, those people in armored limousines.

The GAO taped other conversations with ammunition dealers who offered to sell special armor piercing bullets -- even after the undercover agent said he wanted the ammo sent to Washington, D.C., and was needed to pierce an armored limousine or to "take down" a helicopter.

During its investigation the GAO happened upon another .50 caliber controversy -- that some of the ammo was coming from military surplus sales to the public. Last year over 100,000 rounds were sold to gun dealers by a company that buys and resells surplus and obsolete ammunition from the Pentagon, The GAO study noted, "The sale of armor piercing ammunition in the civilian market poses a threat to public safety."

Considering that the Blagojevich / Waxman report and GAO studies were made public just as Congress was debating gun issues, it might be safe to assume that there was some Congressional discussion on restricting .50 caliber weapons. And considering the national soul-searching that followed the Littleton Colorado high school murders, it might be safe to assume that there was widespread media coverage about the easy availability of the world's most powerful gun, which any 18 year-old can buy on the Internet or win at a gun show raffle.

But there was absolutely no debate about the guns by the House of Representatives. The question of a possible ban or some kind of restriction didn't even to make it to the floor for a vote.

Nor was there a single editorial about the guns found anywhere the press. Only four newspapers -- the Chicago Tribune, Orlando Sentinel, New York Times, and Boston Globe -- ran a story at all; only the Tribune placed it on the front page. There was so little coverage of the topic that this item in the Albion Monitor nearly doubles the word count given to either the controversial guns or the GAO reports.

Should there have been a national debate about banning the weapons? Absolutely. The Violence Policy Center makes an important point: "The marketing of sniper rifles illustrates a calculated decision by the gun industry to sell instruments of war -- with reckless disregard for the inevitable consequences." But it's the words of that gun dealer that haunt: "It's only a matter of time before someone lets a round go on a range that travels so far, it hits a school bus full of kids." Sadly, he's right; only when there's such a tragedy will we hear a national debate about these powerful weapons, and everyone will ask why they weren't outlawed before. (June 30, 1999)

A well-armed populace and homicide   In the NRA mythos, few legends are as revered as much as The Well-Armed Populace -- that everyone should pack heat to stop wrongdoers. Its moral that weapons deter crime certainly has appeal, but it's not that simple. In our second 1995 issue, for example, we reported that homicide rates jumped 74 percent in places like Jacksonville Florida after concealed weapons laws were relaxed, contradicting a popular NRA claim that Florida homicide rates dropped statewide.

Since then, there's been good news: In California crimes are down -- the 1997 homicide rate was the lowest since 1970. Other crimes are dropping, too. Reported incidents of rape have dropped by more than 25 percent in the last ten years; robbery and assault are also down 15 - 20 percent. One of the few statistics that's increasing, however, are incidents of citizens killing wrongdoers for reasons other than self-defense.

In 1995, half of the justifiable homicides were by citizens fighting off attackers. But two years later, citizens were physically threatened only about 18 percent of the time. Compare the 1997 statistics between police and citizens and you'll see that they're exact opposites: cops usually kill only when under assault.

There are other interesting contrasts between these cop / citizen justifiable homicide rates: a felon killed by a citizen is far more likely to be a black or hispanic youth. The odds are 11 times higher that a citizen will kill someone under 18. About half of the felons killed by officers are blacks or hispanics, but citizens kill blacks or hispanics 75 percent of the time. (There's no data on the age or race of the citizens committing justifiable homicide in the 1997 California Homicide Report, which is the latest available.)

Gun activists might still claim these statistics support their self-defense myths. After all, those 37 people killed by citizens were committing a felony of some sort, probably home invasion or store robbery. (Both sound so much more threatening than "caught stealing a VCR" or "grabbing for the fifty bucks in a cashbox.") But still, those cases declared justifiable were less than two percent of the 2,579 homicides that year.

The great majority of the time (about 75 percent), the murdered person in California was a twenty-something black or hispanic killed by another twenty-something black or hispanic. The odds were that the victim lived in the Los Angeles, Fresno, or Oakland areas and knew the person who pulled the trigger. And while only 1 out of four of the overall homicides were gang related, more than half of the kids under 18 killed had some gang connection.

If any kind of legacy emerges from the Littleton Colorado high school massacre, it should be that it truly represents the violence that guns bring. Pulling the trigger is rarely a noble shopkeeper or a frightened citizen in bed; instead, it's thousands of children murdering other children. (June 23 1999)