Civil rights and double standards: Gun owners are forced to "show papers," but media say illegal aliens shouldn't have to
By Tim Inwood
I've been watching with some interest the fallout over the new Arizona law dealing with illegal aliens. I hear the news media moaning that the new law "makes it a crime to be an illegal alien." I'm not joking, that is exactly how they phrased it on several networks and cable news shows. Wow, that is what I always thought illegal meant. I really wish the media would think about what they utter.
I hear President Obama, the ACLU and liberals in general say that to ask someone to show identification to prove they are an American citizen is a violation of their civil rights. These same folks, as I recall, told us that asking someone to show ID when voting is a violation of their civil rights as well.
So now I am a bit confused. With such a broad definition of what a civil right is, and the slightest inconvenience in enforcing the law an outrage, will someone please explain something to me? Why, when using the above logic, that when exercising your civil right to buy and own a gun you have to show identification and undergo a background check to purchase that gun? After all, the U.S. Supreme Court told us in the 2008 Heller decision that gun ownership is a constitutionally protected civil right.
Also, tell me why when it comes to bearing those arms, a specifically enumerated constitutionally protected right, we must take concealed carry classes, pay high fees and again undergo additional background checks, fingerprinting and submit a specific size photograph to the state to do something specifically protected by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 1 section 4 of Ohio's Constitution. Was not turning a right into a state-issued privilege a violation of our rights?
As I am writing this I am watching politicians and media talking heads saying this new law in Arizona is pure fascism and Nazi-like demands to "show their papers." Oh really!
As a concealed handgun license-holder in Ohio, in any encounter with a police officer I am required under penalty of law to disclose I am a CHL-holder (if I am carrying), and then show identification. Funny how I don't see my fellow CHL holders protesting or rioting over that.
Prior to 1968 in the United States, citizens in most states could buy firearms via mail order with no identification. You just clipped out the ad, told the dealer what you wanted, sent in your check and your postal carrier delivered the gun to your door, with ammo if you ordered that too. I am old enough to remember those days. However, all that ended with the Gun Control Act of 1968, a law largely written by Democrat Senator Thomas Dodd, father of current Senator Chris Dodd.
The 1968 U.S. law was largely based on a gun control law written in 1938 that Dodd Sr. learned about while serving on the staff of those prosecuting war criminals in Nuremberg following World War II. That law forced firearm purchasers to show identification "papers" and registry of those arms. Who wrote this law? The National Socialist German government! That is where we got the U.S. 1968 Gun Control Act! That is inarguably a Nazi piece of legislation where you do have to show "papers." So I have to ask, where is the screaming and gnashing of teeth about that Nazi law?
Where is the media's and President Obama's outrage over this truly NAZI violation of civil rights? I'd love to hear the tortured logic. After all, the crime rate among American gun owners is far lower than that of illegal aliens.
Meanwhile, let's enforce the laws and protect our borders.
[Tim Inwood is the current Legislative Liaison and Past President of the Clinton County Farmers and Sportsmen Association, an Endowment Member of the NRA and Life Member of the OGCA, Republican Central Committeeman for Chester Township A, in Clinton County, Ohio, and a volunteer for Buckeye Firearms Association.]