Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 09:05:21 -0600 From: "The Old Blue Howler" <[l--oa--l] at [ICSI.Net]> To: [N--B--N] at [Mainstream.com] Subject: Time Transcript of TM Interview TIME Online's guest for Tuesday, May 30, 1995 was Tanya Metaksa, Executive Director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action. TIME's Nancy Kearney was the moderator. Nktime : Good evening and welcome to TIME Online's weekly press conference. Our guest tonight is Tanya Metaksa, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association. OnlineHost : On the surface, the National Rifle Association would appear to be in trouble, TIME Magazine reported last week, with its house divided, its behavior widely condemned, its membership perceived as kooky, its legislative agenda upended by such defeats as the Brady Bill and the assault weapon ban. But in fact, as TIME reported, the NRA is making a powerful comeback, as a more militant organization. While it has increasingly alienated a majority of America's gun owners, not to mention the public at large, the NRA has attracted a more radical following that is willing to give more money and work vigorously toward the organization's goals. OnlineHost : Just days after an "apology" from Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, over language in a fundraising letter which called federal law enforcement agents, "jack-booted government thugs," the NRA again went on the offensive with a new letter from chief lobbyist Tanya Metaksa, warning its members of an impending "police state" and urging them to attend town meetings with lawmakers to denounce President Clinton's policies. OnlineHost : Ms. Metaksa is the Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (ILA), a post she assumed last year, and develops and implements independent campaigns, legislative strategy and anti-crime initiatives. She also coordinates national and regional advertising and direct mail programs, fosters political activism on the part of NRA members, and administers the $19 million NRA-ILA annual budget. Her political career began in 1969 when she co- founded the Connecticut Sportsmen's Alliance and served as its first lobbyist. Nktime : Good evening Mrs. Metaksa and welcome back to TIME Online. Metaksa : Thank you. Let me get to the point. NRA doesn't believe that "government," per se, threatens the right to arms. NRA believes, and has on many occasions over the years stressed, that certain acts by elements of government have violated the right to arms as well as other fundamental rights. The eagerness of some in the media and others to portray NRA as having universally condemned the institution of government, or all law enforcement agents really tells the American people more about their politics than about NRA's. No one has so consistently stressed the need for everyday people to fight for change within the system --by working for and electing candidates who respect the Constitution as intended by the Framers. Nktime : A recent TIME poll among gun owners found that 47 percent say they agree with the NRA's positions, down 20 percent from 5 years ago. Given public support for the Brady bill and the assault weapon ban, why does the NRA maintain such a hardline policy and how do you respond to those, including gun owners, who say the NRA leadership has drifted off center? Metaksa : Even presuming the poll results to be anything resembling a correct assumption, 47% of the nation's 65 million gun owners equals about 30 million Americans. NRA's position on issues reflects the wishes of its membership. The public's position on the issues you raised is largely a result of the unbalanced treatment those issues have received in the press. We have found, for example, that the public's position on those issues changes once the people have all the facts, not only those that the network newscasters want them to know. Nktime : Let's go to our first audience question from John in West Warwick, RI.... Question : I am not anti-gun, but I am for responsible gun ownership. An automobile is a potentially lethal instrument, therefore it must be registered. Why should a gun be any different? Metaksa : First of all, there is no constitutional protection for vehicle ownership. Second, a car need not be registered to own it, merely to operate on public streets. The analogy you pose lacks a basis.Interestingly, the Centers for Disease Control once asserted a cars-and-gun analogy, claiming that registration of cars and licensing of drivers had caused motor vehicle accidental fatalities to decline 37% between 1968-1991. Fact is, without registration and licensing of guns and gun owners, the firearm-related fatal accident rate dropped about 50% in the same period, the largest decline among accident groups. Nktime : Please send your questions up for our guest, Tanya Metaksa, the NRA's chief lobbyist, using the interact with host icon. Orygun has our next question.... Question : Metaksa, I've heard the NRA opposes the use of taggants in agricultural chemicals, explosives, and/or gunpowder. What is the NRA's position and what is the rationale behind it? Metaksa : NRA has taken no position on the use of taggants with explosives. We are concerned, however, about the use of taggants in smokeless powder and black powder. The issue of taggants first was raised in the 1970s, and it was learned that taggants were a very cost-ineffective police tool. Taggants also pose a safety concern, potentially causing spontaneous combustion due to their affect on the chemical properties of various substances. There are other problems too, such as the simple act that gunpowder can be made from scratch by criminals, taggants can be removed from substances, taggants could be mixed through the mixing of powder or other substances from various batches, powder batches would be shipped across the country, sold to thousands of buyers, the list goes on. Nktime : Portsnice is up next with a question for NRA chief lobbyist Tanya Metaksa... Question : What do you think about George Bush leaving the N.R.A? Metaksa : Some say that Pres. Bush only joined NRA in 1986 in order to get NRA's endorsement in 1988. Others say that he left because NRA didn't endorse him in 1992. Nktime : Stevend555 is up next.... Question : What constitutional protection for gun ownership? The second amendment is about state militias, i.e.. the National guard..even Warren Burger says so..where does the constitution protect gun ownership? Metaksa : Constitutional scholar Steven Halbrook has termed the thesis you suggest as "Orwellian revisionism." The Second Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights which talks about the rights of "the people." The Supreme Court in 1990, U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez, pointed out the consistent use of the term "the people" throughout the Constitution in the Preamble, "the people" ordain and establish the Constitution, in the First Amendment "the people's right to assembly is protected, the Second Amendment protects the right to arms, the Fourth Am. protects "the people" from unreasonable searches and so on. The Court said the term "the people" refers to all persons part of the nat'l community. It is as inconceivable today as it was 200 years ago, that any state, a governmental entity, could possess "rights." Only individuals possess rights, as the text of the Constitution makes clear, and as T. Jefferson articulated in the Declaration of Indep. Jefferson said that all men obtain rights from their creator, while governments derive their "powers" from the people. The Constitution refers to "powers" when it talks about what government may do; "rights" when it talks about what the people possess. Nktime : Yet as TIME and others have pointed out, no federal court has overturned a gun control law based on the second amendment. What does the NRA continue to take such an absolutist position on this amendment? Metaksa : Few cases have ever been taken by the federal courts. The lower courts have been divided on whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right. The Supreme Court has ruled in only a few cases related to the issue. The Court has never ruled against the interpretation we support. NRA is an absolutist on the issue as the Framers themselves were. Nktime : We're talking with the NRA's chief lobbyist Tanya Metaksa, just back from the NRA's annual convention in Arizona. Please send your questions up using the interact with host icon. Tanya will be here until 9:45 p.m. Our next question from ERH12339.... Question : How does the NRA justify the use of inflammatory language such as "jack-booted thugs" and "impending police state"? Metaksa : NRA was talking about abuses of power by agents of the BATFF and FBI in specific cases which are currently either under investigation or have been settled on behalf of the abused citizen. Waco and Ruby Ridge are two cases which the Congress is now going to investigate, to find out all the facts and present them to the American people. We support those investigations and await the verdicts to prove us right. Nktime : I'll take you up on your challenge, GAPNYC... Question : How do you feel about the liberal press such as TIME attempting to "blame" the NRA for the tragedy in Oklahoma City? (ask this if you have the balls, Time Magazine) Metaksa : Elements of the press with an agenda against firearms shared with certain fringe political groups pass up no opportunity to blame NRA for any and everything from tornados to acts of crime. The American people won't be fooled forever. Again, once the acts of the issues are given to the people, they reach conclusions we can all live comfortably with. It drives what you call "the liberal press" out of their wits. Nktime : Jmaio has our next question.... Question : Tanya, More states are passing CCW laws, with Texas being the most recent. Even Oklahoma has, or is about to enact one. Do we yet have hard statistics on what these laws are doing to curb violence? Metaksa : We know, based upon crime data published by the FBI, that states which respect the right to carry firearms for self-protection have far, far, far lower violent crime rates than states that do not. Florida's homicide rate has dropped over 20% SINCE ADOPTING ITS CARRY LAW IN 1987, even as the U.S. rate rose about 15%. Permittees very rarely commit crimes with firearms...the criminals, after all, don't apply for permits and have their records checked. Nktime : I Doubt has our next question for the NRA's chief lobbyist Tanya Metaksa.... Question : How much money (directly and indirectly) does the NRA receive from gun and ammunition manufacturers ? Metaksa : None. It is NRA's policy that our political action committee accepts no funds whatsoever from corporations. The old rag about NRA being funded by the industry is a lie, and it shows either an equal hatred of industry generally, by the anti-gun side, or the belief by them that their potential constituency harbors such a predisposition, and would thus fall for their NRA-and- the-industry lie. Nktime : We'll move on to a philosophical question from XTCMatt who asks... Question : Doesn't society as a whole have "rights" that supersede individual rights for the greater good?? Metaksa : Society, of course, is made of individuals. Also, the premise of this country is that individual rights must be protected against the biases of the majority, a point that would be especially noteworthy if the American majority didn't support the right to arms, which, of course, they do. I'm surprised at the appalling lack of understanding, of the basic lessons of American history and government demonstrated by some. Perhaps we should, as a society focus less on gun issues and more on the shortcomings of our educational system...someone's either not teaching, or not paying attention to what is being taught about our heritage. Nktime : Time for a few more questions for Tanya Metaksa. Tom in Virginia is up next.... Question : How do you explain the low crime rates in democratic societies with strong firearms regulations??? Metaksa : The same way I would explain low crime rates in other countries which have less firearm restrictions than the countries you are talking about, and less restrictions than the high crime parts of the U.S. -- there is no correlation between gun laws and crime rates, one way or the other, for the most part. As noted, though, where gun laws respect the right to self- protection, crime rates are much lower. TIMNktime : To paraphrase many of the questions tonight: why do we need assault weapons? Metaksa : "Need" is something for each individual to decide for him or herself. The issue is not "need" -- certainly not in a free society where liberty is paramount. The issue is rights. If you mean to ask what uses there are for various kinds of firearms, that's another matter. Ask if that is your direction. Nktime : We're about out of time. A couple of predictions -- will we see a Congressional repeal of the Brady Bill and the assault weapon ban? Metaksa : We will see votes in both Houses to repeal the Clinton gun ban. The Brady Act has been ruled unconstitutional in five federal courts and states are opting out of Brady by passing their own versions of Instant Check. Nktime : Thanks to our guest tonight, Tanya Metaksa, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association. Thanks to our audience for their questions...many of which we could not get to this time, but perhaps at a later date. Nktime : Thanks, Tanya, for joining TIME Online again. Metaksa : Thanks for having me!! I enjoyed it, as always. Nktime : A transcript of tonight's conference will be posted in the TIME Press conference area tomorrow. Thanks for joining us and good night! Copyrights 1995 Time Inc. All Rights Reserved.