THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, April 25, 1996 TAG: 9604250004
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A16 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Short : 41 lines
Brian Bell (letter, April 10) believes that U.S. Rep. Owen Pickett of Virginia Beach owes his liberal constituents an explanation for his vote to repeal the ban on semiautomatic assault-style guns. Mr. Bell thought Mr. Pickett's vote was strange since he does not receive financial support from the NRA.
It's not strange to me. The congressman simply votes his conscience and supports the Constitution of the United States.
Mr. Bell wrote that a prominent police commissioner had stated that 12 percent of the police officers killed in the United States had been killed with ``assault-style weapons.'' The truth, acccording to FBI crime statistics for the years 1984 through 1993, is that less than 3 percent of police officers were killed in the line of duty with firearms covered by the Clinton gun ban.
The overwhelming majority that suports the gun ban must answer only biased poll questions and never show up on Election Day. If there is such an overwhelming majority, why did the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly vote to repeal those portions of the Clinton crime bill?
I know the standard responses: ``It's an election year.'' ``It's the NRA.'''
The gun-ban legislation is worthless to start with. Most manufacturers just changed the name of their firearm and removed nonessential parts. Take off the bayonet mounting lug or flash suppressor; now they meet the criteria for a good gun, and then put them back on the market. Same guns; work the same; just look different.
It's obvious that Representative Pickett doesn't owe me an explantion.
ROBERT S. STOKES
Chesapeake, April 10, 1996 by CNB