Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Portland observer. (Portland, Or.) 1970-current | View Entire Issue (June 14, 2000)
J u n e 14, 2000 Page A 4 IJorthuiò (Dbeeruer Have a Happy Father's Day Articles do not necessarily reflect or represent the views of <Elje ^ lo r tla n b (O bavruer la a a H M N i Have guns will cavil by J oe (Hlje JJo rtlan h (Ph sem er USPS 959-680 Established 1970 STAFF E d it o r P C in h ie f , u b l is h e r Charles H. Washington E d i T o R Larry J. Jackson, Sr. B u s in e s s M anager Gary AnnTavlor C opy E d it o r Joy Ramos C r e a t iv e D ir e c t o r Shawn Strahan 4 7 4 7 NE M a r tin L u th e r King, Jr. B lvd. P o rtla n d , OR 9 7 2 1 1 5 0 3 -2 8 8 -0 0 3 3 F ax 5 0 3 2 8 8 - 0 0 1 5 e-m ail new s@ p o rtlan do b server.co m sitecnpbon@portlanriobserver.com P ostmaster : Send address changes to Portland Observer PO Box 31 3 7 Portland, OR 9 7 2 0 8 Periodical Postage paid in Portland, OR Subscriptions are $60.00 per year D E A D L IN E S ki.ocK, S r . In recent months , I have written columns on such diverse and provocative subjects as business greed, the priesthood, ethnic relations, marriage, abortion and obesity. No subject, though, ever produces as much negative reader reaction as do my occasional sallies into the battleground o f gun control. And here we go again ("LOCK AND LOAD!’’) I’m at a loss to understand, much less accept, the quibbling arguments that are raised every time a suggestion is made that firearms should be regulated - even including restrictions on assault weapons and armor-piercing ammunition. Any move in such directions, however minuscule, raises the fear in some o f total confiscation o f weapons by a government running jack-booted over the constitutional rights o f law-abiding citizens. This isn’t about any such draconian measures, or even first steps thataway. Neither do I deny the wisdom o f enforcing all laws presently on the books regarding the ownership, use and misuse o f privately-owned weaponry, so let’s not get bogged down in that pointless “either/or” peeing contest. The strident screams on both extremes o f the debate drown out voices o f reason and compromise. Only two simple questions are posed here: 1. Why not register guns? 2. Why not license gun owners? Automobiles are registered, in part, so that the owners can be traced in the event the vehicles are stolen or involved in illegal activities. Registrants are keenly aware o f their accountability, even in absentia, so they tend to be pretty careful about who gets access to their wheels. Granted, this does not prevent abuse by the law-deriding segments o f our society, but it certainly mitigates the mayhem that would exist without it. Likew ise, people are not privileged to drive unless and until they have shown themselves capable o f doing so without endangering the lives and property o f others. Again, although it is an imperfect preventive, without operators’ licenses our roadways would be as hazardous as snake pits. N eith er reg istratio n nor licensure should be seen as a th reat to sportspeople, collectors, defenders o f the Constitution and protectors o f home, family, business and themselves. Nor do they have anything to hide if none o f their reasons for packing or storing rods are illegal, immoral or hazardous to others. That tired argument about registration and/or licenses being a first step toward confiscation is a reach comparable in credibility to the famous "Rosemary” stretch, offered as an explanation o f incriminating gaps in the Nixon W hite House tapes. Such a total ban would require at least an Act o f Congress and, if the more militant NRAmuses are'correct, repeal o f the Second Amendment. These events are as likely to come about as mandatory lie detector tests during political speeches and court testimony. Aside (although it is beyond the range o f this discussion): The argument that the Second Amendment grants individuals the unrestricted right to forever hold their pieces is a crock that even Davy Crockett (who shot him a bear when he was only three) would recognize as such. Back on target: W hile a thum ping m ajority o f A m ericans favor reasonable gun controls to at least lessen the carnage we presently endure, only a few in our midst favor the extreme o f complete disarmament. Yet the caviling o f gun-huggers continues, dram atized by Charlton Heston’s histrionic "from my cold dead hands” challenge at this year’s NRA convention. Add that organization’s threatened boycott o f Smith & Wesson for “buckling to government pressure” by equipping their pistols with childproof locks. (Can you imagine that? Next thing you know, they’ll be p u ttin g k id -re sista n t caps on baby a sp irin ...a n d TH EN w hat?} Recently, a powerful force entered the fray, on the side o f compromise. Regardless o f their age, I doubt that any readers could now run ten steps with lollipop sticks in their mouths without hearing an echo o f the same familiar voice from the past that cautioned them against playing in mud puddles and taking candy from strangers. Thousands o f these gentle warriors forewent the pampering o f M other’s Day at hom e to dem onstrate for sensible gun control. They want registration, licensure and mandatory locks to protect children...that and nothing more. Why? Because they’re the Mothers...that’s why! (Did you really have to ask?) They were motivated by the same instincts that have stationed them b etw een d a n g e r and th e ir loved ones since the daw n o f tim e. Arrayed against their common-sense approach is a noisy minority o f e x tre m ists w ho are a p p a re n tly b lin d to the b a sic problem . What problem? Quite simply, that there are too many guns too easily available to too many people who might use them unwisely, including both good people and bad guys. What to do about it? "Listen to Mom,” sez I. She might not always be right, but when it comes to playing with fire...or firearms...she’s not likely to be wrong! Letters to the Editor Dear Editor, FOR ALL S U B M ITTE D M A TER IA LS: ARTICLES: Monday by 5 p . m . ADS: Friday by noon The Port land Observ er welcomes freelance subm issions M anuscripts and photographs should be clea rly labeled and w ill be returned ifaccompamedbyaselfaddresseilenvelope A ll created design d isplay ads become the sole property o f the newspaper and cannot be used in other publications o r personal usage w ithout the w ritte n consent o f the general manager, unlcsstheclient has purchased the com position o f such a d © 1996 T H E P O R T L A N D O B SERVER ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION IN W HO LE OR IN PART W ITHO UT PER MISSION IS PRO- HIBITED. The Portland O b se rvcr-O re g o n ’ s Oldest M u lticu ltu ra l P ub hca tio n-is a m em ber o f the National Newspaper Association-Founded in 1885, and The National Advertising Represen tative Amalgamated Publishers. Inc, New York, N Y . and The West Coast Black Publishers A s s K ia tio n * Serving Portland and Vancouver 4 Many Oregonians have good ideas for improving government, and those ideas deserve public recognition. The 2000 O reg o n B e tte r G o v e rn m e n t Competition can help promote them. Organized by the Cascade Policy Institute, the Competition seeks ideas for improving Oregon State and local government. A total o f $40,000 in awards and honoraria is available for the winning ideas. The entry deadl ine is June 30. A distinguished panel of independent ju d g e s, w hich includes form er O regon Secretary o f State Phil Keisling, will select the winners. Winning ideas will be promoted throughout the state and across the country. From th e th re e p rev io u s Competitions, fourteen o f twenty-six winning ideas have been introduced as legislation, seven have passed into law and others have been acted upon at the local level. You should enter the 2000 Oregon Better Government Competition ifyou have an idea for improving some aspect o f Oregon Government. For guidelines, call (503) or refer to w w w .C a s c a d e P o lic y .o r g / bgchome.asp. Sincerely, Angela Fchardt Program Director Come visit us on the web at www.portlandobserver.eom 4 Justice Dept. finding should close book on King’s murder, but probably w on’t Yet another Justice Department probe into the murder o f Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. again found that King w asn’t killed by Mafia hit men, the FBI, Army intelligence, racist hate groups, or black ministers. He was murdered by a two bit hood, James Earl Ray. For the th ird tim e since K ing w as m u rd ered in 1968, Justice Department investigators ripped apart the tissue o f lies Ray grew fond oftel ling over the years, that a mysterious “Raoul” had framed him, that Memphis prosecutors pressured him to accept a deal to cover-up the conspiracy, and that legions o f secret conspirators aided and abetted him. These are flat out fabrications that Ray conjured up to salve his conscience, grab media attention, and cash in on the notoriety o f the case. Jerry Ray, Ray’s brother, Jesse Jackson, the King family, and o f course, conspiracy buffs, swallowed them hook, line and sinker. When a Memphis jury in a much publicized civil lawsuit b ro u g h t by the K ing fam ily ru le d last December that King was the victim o f a contracted hit, conspiracy theorists went into delirium. This gave new lease on life to their claim that Ray was a Lee Harvey Oswald type patsy o f government agents or organized crime figures. The press and conspiracy theorists gleefully glossed over the fact that the court produced no smoking gun documents or credible eyewitness testimony to back Ray’s delusions that he was the fall guy in a vast plot to kill King. The big puzzle is why conspiracy buffs have been so willing to go to the barricades on the trumped up word o f a lo a th so m e , d isc re d ite d con m an? The King assassination had none o f the dangling loose ends o f the Kennedy assassination. From day one police and investigators had the goods on Ray. His fingerprints were on the murder weapon. He was at the crime scene. He fled the country. And he quickly and voluntarily confessed to the murder. The key to the puzzle can be summed up in these words, the FBI. Despite the Justice Department’s convincing report that Ray murdered King, the FBI still has not answered m any questions about the secret w ar it waged against King from the late 1950’s to the day o f his murder. According to voluminous public documents released to researchers and government investigators, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover and the Justice Department relentlessly tried to tie King to the Communist party. The assault on King was more than Hoover acting out his paranoid obsessions against a man whom he considered a dangerous subversive, it was a war against the black movement. And Hoover decided that the cheap and dirty way to win that war was by discrediting the most respected and admired symbol o f that movement. Many o f those dirty tactics employed by FBI agents against King are now well known. They deluged him with w ire ta p s, p h y sic a l su rv e illa n c e , p o iso n -p e n letters, threats, harassment, intimidation, and smear sexual leaks to the media. During its investigation o f the assassination, Hoover claimed that the FBI did not find a single fact to indicate any conspiracy in the assassination. Ray was the man and the FBI slammed the book on the ease. It was the “lone nut” assassin theory repeated again. There is, o f course, no proof that the FBI or other government agents killed King. But the ferocity of the FBI’s secret war against him and the many questions the FBI probe did not publicly answer about Kay’s travels, his possible links to white supremacist groups, and conservative business groups in the South, and the role o f government agents that were at or near the Lorraine Motel the day King was killed have created deep public suspicions that R ay d id n ’t act alo n e and th at the FBI didn ’t tell the complete truth about King’s murder. Those same unanswered questions left enough wiggle room for conspiracy theorists to have a field day trying to unravel se c re t p lo ts, co v er-u p s and fin ally blam e the government for killing King. The Justice Department probe proved for the umpteenth time that the government, racist groups, and organized crime figures did not issue orders to kill King. And to make sure that there were no charges o f cover it smartly kept the FBI out o f the investigation. Yet its finding can’t and shouldn’t absolve the FBI o f its disgraceful, destructive and illegal campaign against King. The climate o f suspicion and hostility it created toward the civil rights movement made it possible for Ray to murder King. And ultimately the FBI still must share some o f the blame for that. Sadly, this will be more than enough to fuel the conspiracy theorist’s cherished fantasy that anybody and everybody but Ray killed King. we wrote ** b o o k «, homebuying for . ■ renters. Well, actually, the brochure. HUD can help you start building your foundation today. Since 1934, we've helped more than 27 million Americans buy a home. Just call 1 -800-HUDS-FHA and ask for our free 100 Questions and Answers brochure. It wii! tell you how to get an FHA loan for as little as 3% down, choose the lender that's right for you, and much more. If you're looking for a home, it's all the information you need S -l 11 \ J
