The following information is provided so that you will understand exactly where Al Gore stands on the issue of gun control. The heavy print indicates a direct quote from the Gore for President site on the Internet. The blue print represents the analysis by John Marshall, Life member, Law Enforcement Alliance of America, and Endowment member, NRA.

Seek a nationally mandated, state-run system of photo licensing for all potential hand gun purchasers. No more loopholes or exceptions – anyone who wants to buy a handgun would have to have a license that would prove they are eligible to own a handgun (having passed a background check to prevent felons and the mentally ill from buying guns and demonstrated knowledge of gun safety). In other words, Al Gore is now on record as declaring the Second Amendment to the Constitution null and void. He is stating that he wants to convert a constitutionally-guaranteed right into a privilege to be granted at the whim of an all-powerful central government. Of course, having a list of all gun owners is central to the ultimate insult to the Constitution: having all the guns turned in at some point in the future. For the record, the Second Amendment states that "…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." What part of "shall not be infringed" doesn’t Gore understand??

Ban so-called "junk guns," the cheap handguns so often used in violent crimes; Here, Gore decides that he wants to discriminate against the poor, by denying only the poor the right of self-protection. The better-off citizens, who can afford expensive guns, may of course buy them; noblesse oblige, we presume. Never mind that the most crime-ridden areas are in low-income areas; depriving the poor of an effective means of self-defense only makes things worse, not better. Criminals, of course, can always obtain guns by theft or drug bartering. For you poor people, says Mr. Gore, we will make it nearly impossible for you to own a gun. This is the worst form of discrimination!

Increase penalties for knowingly selling a gun to someone ineligible to purchase one; for using a gun in a violent crime; and for illegal trafficking of guns; The devil is in the details. What does "knowingly" mean? If someone shows you a bogus drivers license to show residency, or states that he or she has never been a criminal, how will the average citizen know the truth? What would constitute a good faith effort to not "knowingly" sell a firearm to an ineligible person? Make no mistake here; the two objectives are to harass ordinary citizens who choose to sell a gun, and to make sure that all gun sales are conducted through dealers – so the government will know who has what. And what does "illegal trafficking" mean? Does this mean selling more than one firearm a month to private individuals? Or what??? Should a private citizen wish to sell off his or her gun collection, the government wants that person to sell only to a dealer – who will pay only rock-bottom prices so as to make a profit on the resale. Reducing the value of a gun collection by half could ruin one’s day…

Advance a variety of other common-sense gun control measures previously advocated by the administration, including a three day waiting period, one-gun-a-month, closing the gun show loophole, and requiring child-safety locks on hand guns; "Common-sense?" Let’s get real here. Nowhere has it ever been shown that a waiting period of any length reduces crime. The old "heat of the moment" excuse is a myth. No one goes and buys a gun trivially or in any manner other than in a pre-meditated way. The only "heat of the moment" murders are executed in such a manner as to provide a temporary insanity excuse. If you buy a gun with the express intent of committing a murder, that’s pre-meditated, by definition. The people who are really hurt, perhaps fatally, are those with an immediate need for a self-defense implement, and that need will be denied. There are documented cases of abused women wishing to buy self-protection, being denied by a waiting period, and then being murdered in the interim period. That’s one way to cut gun sales, for sure. The "one-gun-a-month" scheme is a trap. The ONLY way to be sure that a person buys no more than one gun a month is to have a central registry of all gun sales – and that’s prohibited to the government under law! "Gun show loophole?" That’s a scam. Private individuals who wish to sell a gun to other law-abiding residents of their own state may do so under law. Whether they do it a gun show or from a truck tailgate should make no difference. Al Gore just wants to be sure that the government gets a record of all guns sold. Of course, that won’t happen – criminals will get their guns on the streets or by robbery, as they always have. "Child safety locks?" Let’s call this one what is: "Lock up your protection." How many lives will be lost as homeowners fumble with locks during a home invasion? Were you aware that a gun lock on a loaded gun actually makes it MORE dangerous by putting weight on the trigger? Will parents falsely think a gun lock is safer than storing the gun securely away from small hands when that’s necessary? Kids are smart – and just like they defeated "child proof" prescription lids, they can and will defeat gun locks.

Provide grants to states to develop systems that end plea bargaining for criminals who use a gun in a crime, and implement a model federal test program; Here, Al Gore is saying that he wants to federal-standardize all gun crimes, and jam the courts with each and every gun case – the results, for the taxpayer, are horrendous. He will have created a Frankenstein of a judicial system that will cost you and me billions.

Oppose efforts to provide special legal protection for gun manufacturers. In other words, Al Gore wants to continue the policy of the Clinton administration: Plaster the legitimate gun manufacturers with phony lawsuits so that they will be forced out of business by the expense of defending against such lawsuits. Instead, there should be a federal law forbidding such nonsense, which the huge majority of the American public thinks is totally wrong. Holding a gun manufacturer responsible for the acts of a criminal is so ludicrous as to be absurd on the face of it, yet this is what your tax dollars are supporting.

Oppose efforts to loosen existing limits on concealed weapons; It’s been proven that "shall issue" concealed carry permit systems result in a marked decrease in violent crime wherever enacted. What Al Gore is saying is that he wants no more legal concealed carry laws; if he is really against crime, he would support them instead of fighting them. Criminals hesitate committing violent crime when they are unsure if their intended victims are armed or not. If there is no permit system, they know that the law-abiding will be unarmed and therefore perfect victims!

Require gun manufacturers and federally-licensed sellers to report gun sales to a state authority. This requirement would greatly assist law enforcement in tracing ownership of guns if they are used in a crime. And then, of course, in the spirit of cooperation, the feds will demand access to all state records relating to gun sales. Ipso facto, a federal gun registry, masquerading as "state records" in a neat end-run against the laws forbidding the federal government to maintain a central registry. Nice slight-of-hand, Al! This is the most vicious subterfuge I’ve seen proposed…

And there you have it – Al Gore’s stated intent to eviscerate the law-abiding American gun owners. It couldn’t be plainer, friends!