Holding Firm on a Life-or-Death Issue : Clinton braces for attacks on gun control laws

As President, Bill Clinton often has been accused of not standing on principle. But following his State of the Union message Tuesday, even his harshest critics cannot question his resolve on sensible controls for firearms. Nor should they doubt his commitment to the vital federal ban on the manufacture and sale of military-style assault weapons.

“A lot of people,” the President said in an eloquent and forceful defense of the assault gun ban, “have laid down their seats in Congress so that police officers and kids wouldn’t have to lay down their lives under a hail of assault weapon attack.” And, he added, “I will not let that (law) be repealed.”

His unambiguous pronouncement comes at a pivotal time for members of Congress who support national controls on firearms and for the solid majority of Americans who stand behind them. They understand that common-sense regulations are indispensable if we are to have a safer society.

What’s more, the President’s vow stands in marked contrast to the poisonous threats by Republican Party leaders, including Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), to undo hard-won passage of the assault weapons ban and the Brady bill, which imposes a five-day waiting period for handgun purchases.

Counting on support from two dozen Democrats, the Republican majority in the House claims it has the votes to override a presidential veto of any repeal of the assault weapons ban.

Two repeal bills have been introduced in the House--H.R. 464, by Roscoe G. Bartlett (R-Md.), and H.R. 125, put forward by Jim Chapman (D-Tex.). However, floor votes may not come until after the first 100 days of the new session.

But when attacks on these beneficial laws come is not as important as why. Let there be no mistake: Repealing the assault gun ban or the Brady bill is not about less government, constitutional rights or refocusing the national debate on punishment and criminals. Such justifications are nothing more than pulp fiction. Repeal serves the narrow interests of the powerful and politically vengeful gun lobby, period.

Assault guns are weapons of combat; they serve no legitimate sporting purpose. They pose a direct and mortal threat to the safety of innocent civilians. Anyone who thinks otherwise need only reflect on the mass slaughters committed with assault weapons in San Ysidro in 1984, Stockton in 1989 and San Francisco in 1993.

President Clinton reminded Americans Tuesday night that he rightly expects the many lawmakers who voted their conscience on this issue last year to do so again. Courage is demanded again in the political chambers of this nation.