Junk This Bad Idea With A Decisive ‘No’

Constitutional rights belong in the Constitution precisely because most, in practice, aren’t popular. It can be downright annoying when people we disagree with exercise their right to freedom of speech, press and religion.

And then, there’s guns. Firearms kill people. They kill Bambi. Yuk. Regulate them. Take them away. Especially handguns.

Unless … Unless you are the one living or working in a high-crime neighborhood. Unless you are the one stalked by some demented creep or violent ex-husband. Then, everything changes and owning a firearm may seem wise - or so many Americans have concluded. Also, for outdoor enthusiasts firearms not only are useful, but enjoyable.

People who don’t walk in these shoes - limousine liberals from the Seattle cocktail party set - have lavishly bankrolled an assault on the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. It’s known as Initiative 676 and it’s on the Nov. 4 ballot.

This initiative ought to be resoundingly defeated.

On the surface its provisions seem innocuous. They aren’t. They’re facism, marching in the tassled loafers of do-good, big-government bossiness. They’d spark an explosion of litigation and bureaucracy, would criminalize and hamstring the law-abiding and merely would amuse real criminals, who’d ignore them.

Maybe you dislike guns. Many of us do. But suppose the initiative were attacking a constitutional right you treasure - the right to vote. Suppose that before voting Americans had to take a class, pass a political screening test and pay a fee - and repeat the process every five years. Years ago, some parts of the United States tried that sort of thing, to keep blacks out of polling places. It’s flat wrong to charge admission to a constitutional right.

Initiative 676 would require everyone who possesses a handgun to obtain a license from the state, every five years. To get a license, gun owners would have to take an eight-hour class, pass a proficiency test and pay a $25 fee. Guns possessed without a license would be seized by the state and owners would be prosecuted. (That’d be popular. Move over, Ruby Ridge.) Also, every firearm would have to have a trigger lock when sold. (Big deal. If you need a gun for protection, will you put that lock on it? Not likely.)

Anyone who has followed the gun issue knows Initiative 676 is a recipe not for compliance, but for rage, frustration, civil disobedience and lawsuits.

Training and even trigger locks are good ideas. But bureaucratic assaults on a constitutional right are a stupid way to persuade people to embrace them. Responsible gun owners have taken classes and stored firearms safely for years.

Tragic gun accidents are simply that: accidents. Bureaucracies and regulations can’t prevent them, particularly in careless homes where regulations are ignored and accidents are likely. The energy being wasted on this totalitarian proposal ought to be spent on an educational campaign for voluntary compliance, instead.

, DataTimes The following fields overflowed: SUPCAT = COLUMN, EDITORIAL, ENDORSEMENT - Our view CREDIT = John Webster For the editorial board