Date: Fri, 12 May 1995 08:39:40 -0700 From: [j--a] at [primenet.com] (James B. Andrews) To: [n--b--n] at [mainstream.com], [b--c--c] at [primenet.com], [F--RG--N] at [AOL.COM], Subject: Letter from Tanya Metaksa Please copy this letter to all points. Thank You. May 5, 1995 Dear Member of the NRA Board of Directors: For many months now, I've kept you informed by periodic letters like this one of our meteoric progress, not just in defense of our Second Amendment rights, but our advancement of those rights. You have witnessed the positive media coverage we and we alone have generated by pushing Right to Carry laws across the various states.=20 Even TIME magazine tipped its hat to our enactment just this year of Right to Carry in Virginia, Utah, Idaho and Bill Clinton=FEs home state of Arkansas. It has passed both houses of the legislatures in Texas and Oklahoma, and it is moving in Ohio, Michigan, North Carolina, South Carolina and California. On the federal side, you have witnessed an unprecedented partnership between the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader on arresting the movement of restrictive gun control and supporting repeal of the Clinton Gun Ban. And that partnership led to a comprehensive education strategy that is well underway. You have seen witness after witness tell the positive story of private firearms ownership to the U.S. Congress, scholars speaking to the true meaning of the Second Amendment and social scientists debunking gun control as ineffective. And you have witnessed the most monumental educational conference in the nation's capitol on the right to bear arms -- "The Second Amendment: Right Under Fire?" -- a symposium featuring prominent scholars, journalists, public health and criminology professionals, leading presidential candidates and other leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. 1995 has been a grand year for our Association, and I continue to draw inspiration from our membership, you and the entire NRA Board of Directors, and the ILA staff who, believe me, have worked tirelessly into long nights and endless weekends to make all these successes possible. Then there was April 19th.=20 Along with all other Americans, I am as outraged as I am deeply saddened by the terrorist attack on innocent men, women and children in Oklahoma City. As a mother and a grandmother of small children, it is difficult to find the words to adequately describe the grief and horror of that event. I find the actions of the perpetrators and their accomplices, whoever they may be, unfathomable and barbaric. Let's be clear: NRA advocates freedom, the constitution and the rule of law. And NRA advocates the death penalty for criminal terrorists who harbor nothing but contempt, not just for freedom, the constitution and the rule of law, but for innocent human life.=20 Within hours of the horror, President Bill Clinton called for a period of mourning and cautioned against casting blame where blame clearly did not belong. On April 22, the Washington Post followed suit and called on all Americans to resist "any inclination to indulge in charges of broad-based, diffuse and unspecified culpability." Although you and I seldom, if ever, agree with Bill Clinton or the Post editorial board, we can certainly agree on those points.=20 Sadly, our opponents and their allies in the press have shunned this sound advice. =20 In recent days, NRA's political opponents have sought to exploit this tragedy to advance their political agenda, and the establishment media has saluted smartly. The scape-goating and hate-mongering have been leveled at law-abiding gun owners in general and the National Rifle Association of America in particular. Such irresponsible actions deepen an already shocking tragedy in which, as Wayne LaPierre pointed out so poignantly on "Meet the Press" last Sunday, NRA members numbered among victims and rescuers. =20 In this period of yellow journalism, I would like to take this opportunity to give you my honest, frank appraisal of the issues that are surfacing by muck-rakers eager to exploit this tragedy, impugn this Association and halt our progress. Make no mistake about it. That is the bottom line goal of the gun prohibitionists, their big-city media allies and no doubt the President himself:=20 stop the NRA at all costs. So I ask that you keep this in mind as you read further and as I set the record straight on a number of lies, half-truths and innuendoes. ------------------------ First, before we treat the issue of political rhetoric, let's state the facts.=20 The persons who planned and executed the bombing in Oklahoma City are solely and exclusively responsible for it and should face the death penalty for their barbarism. Nothing NRA did or might have refrained from doing contributed at all to that atrocity. Weather reports in Florida don't cause damage; hurricanes cause damage. It was evil, and it isn't right or accurate to describe it any other way. Scape-goating amounts to making excuses for it. Making excuses for it lends an air of justification. There was no justification. It was evil. In the wake of this tragedy, Americans are united in our grief for the victims and our insistence on swift, sure justice for the vicious perpetrators and their accomplices. We are also united in saluting federal, state and local law enforcement for their professionalism in the wake of this horrific criminal act. There was no need to conduct a poll to discover these two obvious points, but someone did.(1) But the pollster was shocked to find Americans as divided on fear of government as we are united in grief for the lost and praise for authorities. For while Americans were saluting federal (and state and local) law enforcement for their brilliant performance following the atrocity, as many as four in ten Americans reported that they perceive an "immediate threat" to their civil liberties from the federal government. This was no "angry conservative" voice the pollster heard; by a few percentage points, more liberals than conservatives feared federal abuse of power. A more recent poll produced more sobering results. As many as 52% -- a majority of Americans -- reported the fear that the "Federal Government has become so powerful that it poses a threat to the rights and freedoms of citizens."(2) On a vast array of issues, this reflects an ocean of discontent with federal power. NRA rhetoric amounts to rain on that ocean. =20 It's not just NRA but a majority of Americans who believe we have the right to be secure in our homes. Institutionally, BATF must have its doubts. This past summer, fifteen to twenty armed men (IRS and BATF agents) burst into the rural Pennsylvania home of Mr. and Mrs. Harry Lamplugh. The family cooperated -- opening safes, handing over papers -- but cooperation did not cool the intruders' wrath. One held a machine gun in their faces. Another uttered a racial slur. One emptied vial after vial of cancer medicine, crushed it on the bathroom floor and confiscated cancer treatment records. Another stomped a pet cat to death. The Lamplughs are gun show promoters. BATF's purpose here seems clear: reduce or eliminate lawful commerce in a lawful product through intimidation and brutish intrusion. I maintain it is the right role for NRA to speak forcefully when federal agents rough-up cancer patients, and if you listen to the Lamplughs tell it, you'd be convinced that NRA's rhetoric was mild in comparison. =20 Remember the Fourth Amendment? Monique Montgomery doesn't. All the St. Louis woman remembers is masked men breaking into her bedroom at four in the morning. Yes, they shouted who they were, but the glaring lights and the timing of the hit were meant to maximize Monique's disorientation as she woke from a deep sleep. =20 She accessed a gun for self-defense, but the intruders -- BATF agents -- already had their guns drawn and shot her four times, seriously wounding her. Our understanding is that she has a case pending against the agency. In covering this government assault on an innocent woman, the St. Louis Dispatch wondered editorially whether BATF learned "any lessons in patience" from the debacle in Waco. So do the rest of us. In its ad being criticized as part of the "blame game," the National Rifle Association called upon the Clinton Administration to (1) regain control of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; (2) expose and prosecute those guilty of civil rights abuses and (3) institute strict policies that honor the Bill of Rights. That prescription is indicated by the facts. It's that prescription that is opposed by the anti-gunners and the Administration. =20 On April 30 on "Meet the Press," Attorney General Janet Reno assured the public that if specific cases of abuse were brought to her attention, she would examine them. =20 The fact is, specific cases were brought to the Administration=FEs attention, however, and no action has been taken.=20 In the wake of the tragedy in Waco in April 1993, NRA issued a nationwide news release calling for fact-finding that is "thorough and independent." Our release called for "a full investigation to proceed immediately in court, in Congress and through the White House," and we proposed that President Clinton "consider appointing an independent special prosecutor." No response. In January 1994, NRA formed a coalition with the American Civil Liberties Union and a host of other groups concerned about civil rights which wrote to the president and referred to numerous cases of abuse by federal agencies, only two of which dealt with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF). This coalition called for a national commission to study the cases, establish the truth, find a remedy and administer it. =20 No response. In January 1995, the same group met again and re-issued the call for action. Save for a single meeting with a Justice Department staffer, no action has been taken.=20 Let's be clear. As I stated earlier, there is absolutely no reason and no justification for the criminal act that claimed innocent life in Oklahoma City. We concur with President Clinton that healing must commence. We also believe strongly that healing can commence only when the Administration takes positive action to examine these many specific abuse cases in the light of day, establish the truth and, at long last, act on the truth. =20 In short, NRA has never failed to speak. Thus far, Bill Clinton has always failed to act.=20 ---------------------- Next, let me discuss a distasteful message that appeared on the bulletin board system I operated. A gun prohibitionist organization has tried to make political hay out of a message transmitted to an electronic bulletin board. We denounce both the organization, the individual who posted the message, the message itself and attempts by others to somehow impugn NRA and me personally. This sort of one-in-a-million message denigrates the customarily high intellectual quality of the debate carried on in NRA's electronic forums day in and day out. =20 Anyone can upload anything to an open and unrestricted bulletin board system -- just as anyone can mail anything to someone=FEs mailbox at home totally outside the control of the homeowner. As a result, it has become all too common for people with a variety of motives, some good and some bad, to upload files to bulletin board systems. The bulletin board in question -- Bullet'N Board, purges files periodically that are distasteful and inappropriate. The file in question was uploaded onto the system, then purged at a later date. I would not be surprised to learn that the posting itself was politically motivated to embarrass me, the NRA and impugn the good will and good reputation of gun owners and NRA members who use the system.=20 Electronic communications is part of "the new media." From the days of the fight against the Clinton gun ban, through Election '94 and into the efforts this year to pass Right to Carry and repeal the Clinton gun ban, electronic communications has served NRA well as one of the most effective ways not just to communicate back and forth with our most active members, but also as a tool to prompt them to greater legitimate, useful political action. In fact, our prowess in this new field has received favorable coverage in the political press. But electronic communications is also new territory for Americans as well. Unwanted, unsolicited and irresponsible incoming messages have plagued many in the communications industry, including Prodigy and America On-line. NRA has instituted a protocol whereby we will screen incoming messages prior to them being made available to all system subscribers.=20 Someone "posted" (sent) a vile message. I did not send it. The system automatically received it. I denounce it, and I have taken steps to police all systems to ensure to the best of our ability that no more vile, unsolicited junk mail appears again. I might add that, on system start-up, when people on the system learned my gender, some few sent messages that amounted to vile, sexual advances. I didn't appreciate those messages either, and no one in their right mind would suggest that I was responsible for my own sexual harassment. ----------------------- Next, let's discuss the so-called "citizen militia" movement. =20 Since this phenomenon emerged, neither the NRA Institute nor I have=20 diverged from NRA policy. And that policy is clear: First, for decades, NRA has followed an explicit policy established by the NRA Board of Directors that condemns violent individuals and groups, including those advocating the violent overthrow of the government of the United States. Second, when authorities have reasonable suspicion of criminal activity on the part of individuals or groups, they should investigate and, if the evidence so indicates, prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. Third, NRA defends the individual right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes. The militia clause does not weaken or strengthen that individual right. The NRA, of course, has never been involved in the formation or support of any so-called "citizen militia" unit. Consistently, it has been gun control advocates and their "collective right" rhetoric that has advanced the myth that the individual right to keep and bear arms is contingent upon participation in a "citizen militia."(3) It has been NRA that has battled against this myth.=20 According to competent independent scholars, the militia clause of the Second Amendment merely adds to the reason for the right, which is a common law right rooted in the fundamental right of self- defense. While in Michigan for a speaking engagement, press events and meetings with NRA members, I met with two representatives of the so-called "Michigan Militia Corps," a Mr. Olson and a Mr. Adams.=20 We met in the lobby lounge of the Lansing hotel (hardly a "secret meeting" as averred by the press) where I was staying. The discussion was at their request. =20 My impression confirms various news reports that the representatives of this so-called "militia" evinced little confidence in any official beyond the local county sheriff. I found that notion a sign of detachment from the processes of participatory democracy at all levels of government in which NRA members and other citizens have been so successfully involved. I also found it counter to everything NRA and our members have done across the political spectrum in recent months -- namely, supporting candidates and advancing legislative initiatives at the state and federal as well as local levels. Despite irresponsible remarks by Mr. Adams to the contrary, there was no discussion pertaining to the election of officers of the NRA Board of Directors. Two things were discussed: NRA policy and the reason for it, and their group and their justification for it. The representatives appeared intent on convincing me that NRA adopt a new policy more supportive of their group. They were unsuccessful. I indicated clearly that, while I could not speak for the board, it was doubtful that NRA would change its position, and I was certainly not inclined to suggest a change in policy. At least three times toward the close of the brief talk, they expressed that they were "extremely disappointed" at the results of the discussion. I came away from that talk more convinced than ever of three basic points. First, after listening to their circuitous logic, I agreed with NRA President Tom Washington that we have nothing to do with them. Second, they were emblematic of the ocean of discontent we have in this country. Third, NRA's political effort -- committed to bringing more and more citizens into the process, registering to vote, getting active, etc. -- is more vital to the future of our nation than ever before. ---------------------- I hope this frank discussion has been helpful to you. Let me close by reminding you of those shocking poll results I discussed at the beginning of this letter. There is no question that we must fight against criminal terrorists, because that is a battle for the safety of our nation. It is also clear that we must fight this fear and bring America back into community, because that is a battle to regain the soul of our nation. That demands unity and leadership. I am confident that the team we now have, from NRA President Tom Washington down to the newest NRA member who just signed up today, will provide that unity and that leadership to a nation looking for a steady course that takes us toward freedom, the constitution and the rule of law. Finally on a personal note, let me express my thanks to all of you who took the time to call and send cards of sympathy at the passing of my father, John Chamberlain, a few weeks ago. Your support during this time has been a great blessing to me and my family. Yours for the Second Amendment, Tanya K. Metaksa Executive Director -------------------------- (1) USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll, reported April 26, 1995. (2) Time/CNN poll, April 27, 1995, by Yankelovich Partners, Inc. (3) Sonya: "Would you help us all understand what the right to bear arms should mean to a citizen in this country?" U.S. Rep. Butler Derrick: "Well, let's first say that under the Constitution, the Constitution says that a citizen has a right to form a militia and to bear arms. Now there are different interpretations but my interpretation of that is that they need to get together like the National Guard or something like that and form a militia for the defense from outside forces."=20 -- Sonya Live (CNN) March 16, 1993 (during the Waco siege) =3D+=3D+=3D+=3D+ This information is provided as a service of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, Fairfax, VA. This and other information on the Second Amendment and the NRA is available at any of the following URL's: http://WWW.NRA.Org,=20 gopher://GOPHER.NRA.Org, wais://WAIS.NRA.Org, ftp://FTP.NRA.Org, mailto:[L--TP--C] at [NRA.Org] (Send the word help as the body of a message) Information may also be obtained by connecting directly to the=20 NRA-ILA GUN-TALK Bulletin Board System at (703) 934-2121. {PB =1A $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ James B. Andrews Phone 602-943-7351 Objective $ $ NRA Endowment FAX 602-997-6248 Viewpoint $ $ Republican Liberty Caucus E-Mail [j--a] at [primenet.com] Activist $ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$