Editorial: Gun grabbers invade Springfield

Richard Pearson, ISRA Executive Director

About 150 Chicagoans swooped down on the state capitol to let the legislature know that, when it comes to banning your guns, they mean business. April showers prevented another dozen or so protesters from showing up to hear riveting antigun speeches from the likes of Fr. Mike "Snuff'em" Pfleger and Illinois' Governor DeLuxe, Pat Quinn.

Those who bothered to listen heard the same old stuff about how the solution to Chicago's murder problem is to take the guns away from the rest of us. Nowhere was there a mention of how two-thirds of Chicago murders are gang-related. Nowhere was there a mention of how almost 90% of Chicago murderers have previous criminal records. Nowhere was it mentioned that about 75% of murder victims have previous criminal records. No, the message was that Chicago has suffered enough at the hands of callous, heartless suburbanites and downstaters who dare to own firearms.

Of course, the gun-grabber rally enjoyed huge attention from the gun-hating press. Early morning Chicago news programs ran remotes from local demonstrator mustering points complete with talking heads and satellite trucks. Special units of the Chicago Police Department cordoned off areas for several blocks around protester bus loading points. And there were probably about 2 reporters for every 3 protesters who showed up at the Capitol's Lincoln Steps. By comparison, the press pretty much boycotted IGOLD 2013 despite the fact that we had in excess of 8,000 attendees.

Of course, in the eye of the media, a gathering of 150 anti-gunners demonstrates that there is a widespread mandate for gun control while, on the other hand, a gathering of 8,000-plus gun rights supporters illustrates that there are too many dangerous people on the loose. Welcome to Illinois.

Public Approval of Hunting Highest Since 1995

A survey conducted by Responsive Management, an independent research firm secured by NSSF, shows 79 percent of the American public approve of hunting. It marks the highest level of support for hunting since 1995. The nationwide scientific survey showed the public's approval of hunting rose five points in the past year, up from 74 percent in 2011. The survey, conducted in February 2013 using random digit dialing and supplemental cellular telephone sampling, was the fifth in a series of similar surveys by Responsive Management to track trends in public approval of hunting since 1995. Support for hunting has remained generally consistent during this time--73 percent in 1995; 75 percent in 2003; 78 percent in 2006; 74 percent in 2011; and a peak of 79 percent in 2013. Mark Damian Duda, executive director of Responsive Management, is still looking at survey results to better understand why approval has increased. Said Duda, "Approval of hunting among Americans is fairly stable and bounces between 73 and 79 percent. The reasons for this increase are still unclear, but it is probably related to the increase in hunting and shooting participation.

SAF alarmed at absence of civilian arms rights

in UN Arms Treaty

The controversial Arms Trade Treaty passed by the United Nations General Assembly (GA) with the United States' support represents an alarming policy shift, and a potential threat to American gun rights, the Second Amendment Foundation said. "The vote was not about public safety," stated SAF founder and Executive vice president Alan Gottlieb. "The United States already has the strongest regulations in the world on the international trade of conventional weapons." The U.S. broke with its policy requiring consensus and not only voted for the treaty but sponsored it. Julianne Versnel, SAF's Director of Operations, who spoke about self-defense in an NGO, statement expressed disappointment. "We have been working for 7 years on an ATT. There have been eight lengthy multi-day meetings and we still can't get the right of civilians to self-defense acknowledged," she observed. Of primary concern is the fact that civilian arms appeared to be included in the treaty, yet there is no recognition of the lawful right of civilians to own, trade and use small arms for self-defense. The language used in the Scope does not exclude "firearms that are lawfully owned by civilians and are not part of international commerce." The language was also unclear concerning international travel with firearms by hunters and sport shooters.