So, let us talk about what is reasonable and what is not.
We think it is reasonable to provide mandatory, instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere for anyone. That means closing the Hinckley loophole so the records of those adjudicated mentally ill are in the system.
This is not new or a change of position or a concession. I have been on the record on this point consistently, from our national meeting in Denver to paid national ads and position papers, to news interviews, and press appearances. But I have repeatedly emphasized that this administration must stop illegally keeping records of lawful gun buyers.
In fact, it is the media's well-kept secret that the NRA was an early architect and supporter of the National Instant Check System now in place. Chairman McCollum knows; we worked with him on Instant Checks, gosh, more than a decade ago now.
We think it is reasonable to provide for instant gun checks at shows just like at gun stores and pawn shops. But what is unreasonable is how the proposed Lautenberg legislation ignores the 250,000 prohibited people, like felons, who walked away from gun stores, instead of being prosecuted for a Federal felony for trying to buy a gun. We think it is reasonable to prevent all juveniles convicted of violent felonies from owning guns for life. What is unreasonable is how Lautenberg can prevent your law-abiding son from inheriting his grandpa's shotgun collection because Lautenberg classifies him as a gun-show dealer who must be Federally regulated.
We think it is reasonable to prosecute more than just two dozen thugs last year for putting illegal guns in criminals' hands. What is unreasonable is that Lautenberg considers legal guns in private hands subject to intrusive Federal regulation even in they privacy of your home.
For a century we have taught it is not reasonable but essential to use safety locks, trigger locks, gun safes, or any voluntary means to keep firearms out of the wrong hands. What is unreasonable is Lautenberg can put you in prison for just failing to keep records of how many guns you own.
We think it is reasonable to make gun show Instant Check just like gun store instant checks. What is unreasonable is how Lautenberg could define your Wal-Mart, your uncle's skeet shooting range, your next door neighbor's firearms collection or your local sporting clays competition or any person or place with 50 or more firearms as a gun show subject to intrusive government regulation. That is just crazy.
We think it is reasonable to demand strict prosecution of criminal activity whether it takes place in a big city alleyway or a small town gun show. What is unreasonable is that Lautenberg instead demands strict registration of law-abiding gun buyers giving the Federal Government the name, the address, the type of gun, the serial number, not of the criminals but of Americans deemed not to be criminals by the Instant Check.
We think it is reasonable to provide full funding in Congress of a National Instant Check System. It operates efficiently and effectively. What is unreasonable is how Lautenberg authorizes an unlimited gun tax on purchaser by law-abiding citizens.
And, finally, we think it is reasonable to expect our Government to prosecute more than 24 hoods last year for providing guns to criminals. What is unreasonable is how Lautenberg makes everyone prosecutable if you just talk about buying or selling a gun at a gun show even if you have no gun in your possession.
We think it is reasonable to support the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act. What is unreasonable is 6,000 students caught with illegal guns at school the last 2 years and only 13 prosecutions.
We think it is reasonable to demand that when a lawful gun buyer passes a criminal check, purchases a firearm, records of that transaction be destroyed. What is unreasonable is Lautenberg decrees that we trust Government bureaucrats to compile and keep names and addresses and firearm types of millions of honest legal gun owners with no legitimate law enforcement purpose.
We think it is reasonable to expect full enforcement of Federal firearms laws by the Federal Government. What is unreasonable is the Justice Department claims that Federal gun laws are for the States to enforce. Reasonable people know that a case made in State court means plea bargains, judge shopping, and no mandatory minimum sentencing.
Even Mayor Rendell of Philadelphia knows this, if the Justice Department does not. He said just recently and I quote: ''In State court we average for these types of gun violations a 4-month prison sentence. The Federal guidelines are 59 months in prison. That is a five-and-a-half year difference. Incarcerating convicted felons in possession of firearms for that length of time will save lives, it will save carnage, it will save people from being maimed.''
That is why we support Project Exile, the fierce prosecution of Federal gun laws that has cut crime rates overnight in the few places it has been tried. Even though this administration resists it, we think it is reasonable because it works.
We only support what works and our list is proud.
