Katie Couric isn’t the only journalist whose bona fides on gun issues are in the sewer.
Writing for the Gannett news empire’s #2 rag, The Arizona Republic, columnist E.J. Montini, a talented, prolific but virulently biased gun-hating writer may have set a record for the greatest number of anti-rights gun myths in one short article, at 11.
Because his paper does not allow rebuttals or even meaningful error corrections, Montini gets away with murder, figuratively speaking. Couric got caught with evidence. This writer got caught with stubborn things—facts.
Montini’s name has been submitted as a candidate for a Golden Calf Award, issued periodically by Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, , bestowed upon a person or group who:
“through specific and deliberate action worships at the false god of deceptively named “gun control” and seeks to undermine the G-d given right of all people to keep and bear arms for all legitimate purposes.”
If you agree Montini is worthy of the award after reading about the contents of his recent column, please send a memo to JPFO: JPFO@liberty.seanet.com
Here is the analysis of Montini’s nominated entry. Each element starts with Montini’s myth in italics, followed by reality.
1) Polls constantly show 90% of the public support “universal” background check bills.
Reality: I’ve read them, these bills call for gun registration, confiscations and arrests, which the polls don’t mention, making the results a sham. When properly explained, the public is revolted by the plans: “Would you support arresting people if a federal gun registry has inaccurate data on them due to missing guns, missing entries or wrong serial numbers?” And that’s the least of what the bills do. Support there is minuscule. Name anything 90% of the public supports, let alone guns, this doesn’t even pass the smell test.
2) The powerful NRA prevents the bills from moving through Congress.
Reality: Though the NRA has an undeniable roll, Congress itself rejects the bills on legitimate grounds and is responsive to the 100 million gun owners who object to being deceived, disarmed or subarmed and press their reps directly (NRA has only 5 million members). Facing irrational and bizarre bills helps the proposals sink.
3) We could ban the sale or possession of armor piercing bullets.
Reality: Armor-piercing bullets are already banned—only for the public. “Officials” though can have them for use against, well, anyone. The shift in balance of power this represents is too fundamental for most journalists to comprehend. The statism of E.J.’s suggestion here escapes him.
4) We could ban the sale or possession of hollow-tip bullets.
Reality: Because hollow ammo is far safer, police require its use, and the public prefers it. Banning it would be both dangerous and stupid, but people (like Montini) with intact ignorance don’t understand this at all. Police had to have a federal law enacted to prevent similarly ignorant bureaucrats from banning their possession of safe effective hollow ammunition when they travel. The public seeks the same safety officers crave for the same reasons. This myth deserves an apology (well, they all do).
5) We could limit magazines to ten bullets.
Reality: He means cartridges, or rounds of ammo (bullets are one-quarter of a cartridge, but we can decipher him). Because less ammo is extremely dangerous in a firefight when your life depends on it, police and other officials would never accept such a ludicrous suggestion, and always guarantee an exclusion for themselves when such outrageous proposals are made. The public deserves at least such moderate common-sense safety considerations. Why would you want criminals to have any bullets? Hint: They can have none legally. Why would you want to handicap the innocent? Hint: to salve your own internal hoplophobic terrors. Seek treatment.
6) Codify wider access to mental health records to prevent people with serious illness from buying weapons.
Reality: This of course is already law. Mental health processionals stand in the way for numerous legitimate reasons—why vilify sick people, discouraging the sick from getting treatment, invasion of privacy, refusal to violate doctor-client privilege, fear of reprisal for failure to properly act and more, but might as well blame the invisible gun forces for the problem, it’s easier and it fits the progressive narrative.
7) Obama tried to do this by executive order but it should be law.
Reality: This is two myths actually. Obama cannot and should not enact law by fiat or executive order, or the nation is lost, and the president should be removed from office for usurping powers not delegated, but liberals like Montini care not for such fundamental values if it suits their ends. And as previously mentioned it is law.
8) Repeal the congressional ban on having the CDC do studies on gun ownership and the effects on public health.
Reality: Because the CDC had operated well outside the bounds of science, any legitimate delegated authority, and had used its vast resources to lobby against the Bill of Rights and gun ownership, a ban on using taxpayer funds to continue campaigning against our fundamental rights was and remains entirely appropriate. This is not exactly a myth or error, it is just entirely deceptive and misleading. Private research is still 100% available and can and should be conducted, but its results do not comport with Montini’s wishes, since it shows the enormous social utility of firearms and value of an armed public.
9) Expand gun owning restrictions on people convicted of domestic violence.
Reality: There is already a total denial of the right to keep and bear arms for this misdemeanor. Granted, it is ineffectively enforced, just like “useless, futile” orders of protection (the U.S. Supreme Court’s descriptions), something more law won’t correct. This is not something Montini seeks to fix, which is really needed. He calls for feckless “expand restrictions” which are already at 100%, not “disarm dangerous people,” a total blind spot.
10) Establish a national waiting period for gun purchase.
Reality: Specifically banned by the language of the Second Amendment, the Founders would be appalled at the suggestion. The idea of this delay in exercising the human and civil right to arms has been so thoroughly discredited it is hardly worth repeating.
Expecting a psychotic or other miscreant to get a gun after a short wait, and then to remain reasonable for the rest of all time is insane. Preventing a person who needs a gun immediately for defense is an act of violence and cannot be justified. Conditions suggested for the Second Amendment must be gauged against the rest of the Bill or Rights for validity (e.g., waiting periods to attend church, read books, hold meetings, etc.) and point out the ludicrous nature of such suggestions and the irrational behavior—of people making them.
11) “Impulse violence.”
Reality: The belief that a written law will prevent people from being impulsive demonstrates a lack of mental stability in the people seeking to implement it.
Montini has proven himself worthy of a Golden Calf Award.
—
Alan Korwin is the author of 14 books, 10 of them on gun law. His book After You Shoot examines ways to lower your risks after a self-defense shooting. He has been invited twice to observe oral argument in gun cases at the U.S. Supreme Court. Reach him at GunLaws.com, where he is the publisher of Bloomfield Press.
