Quote of the day–Fred LeBrun

I have absolutely no use for protecting those trafficking in illegal guns. Even those who would do so on principle. Street guns, slithering from state to state, do too much harm.


Fred Lebrun
November 12, 2008
Lock, load and try taking aim at the illegal handguns
[This is from a guy that claims to support gun ownership. This was the first instance I had heard of guns slithering. I would have thought they sort of hopped when the slide release was disengaged. But maybe this “street gun” he talks about is some new type that I’m not familiar with.


Regardless of their mode of locomotion Lebrun has a very naive viewpoint of the world. He thinks the following would somehow be a good idea and wouldn’t be a problem for gun owners:


…a national identification system for handguns. A computerized system that would be accessible to all law enforcement agencies, and that would standardize the requirements for handgun ownership coast to coast.


What he apparently doesn’t understand is there is already a Federal standard requirement for handgun ownership coast to coast. It’s called the Second Amendment. And even with that there are people who been chipping away at that with waiting periods (the original Brady Act), restrictions on who can purchase (age, prior felony convictions, prior domestic violence convictions and accusations), storage requirements, and types of handguns (“junk guns”, “Saturday Night Specials”, “armor piercing”, too powerful, too concealable, too many rounds). This incremental approach is what the people of the UK bought into which ultimately resulted in their complete loss of handguns.


It appears he is suggesting universal registration of handguns. He is hopelessly naive if he believes this will fly. He need look no further than Canada to see their gun registration failure. Then he should try to answer Just One Question.–Joe]


Update: Jeff and Sebastian both have posts up about the same article.

5 thoughts on “Quote of the day–Fred LeBrun

  1. Jeeze, the blinkered arrogance. He really doesn’t pull his head out of the sand (or elsewhere) to even examine what’s already in place – and furthermore assumes *He* being so special, can invent a “better” wheel…

  2. “This incremental approach is what the people of the UK bought into which ultimately resulted in their complete loss of handguns.”

    Correction; it resulted in their complete loss of legal handguns. Illegal handguns of course remain in circulation. Their sales are not registered. One upshot of which is that there is now yet one more opportunity niche in the UK black market.

    DirtC; they know full well that there are tons of restrictions already. They’re hoping enough people are ignorant enough to believe their misinformation. They are probably right. The claims that an “unregulated” credit banking system resulted in the housing “bailout” is a perfect example. They create a problem, blame it on capitalism, then use that false assertion to take over more of the economy (purely as an emergency measure of course). They’re playing the same game with our 2A rights, and for decades it’s been working more than it’s been failing.

  3. Joe I have a different One Question, Who will you send to get my guns, your Wife, or Children? Obviously You wont come.

  4. “Where the current wackiness about gun confiscation gets in the way of a sensible national identification policy is this: If paranoia takes hold when there is not a clue to support the view that confiscation is on anybody’s agenda, consider what the reaction will be to a national system, which will touch off all manner of slippery slope imaginings about confiscation and bans.”- Fred Lebrun


    “I’m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. Of course, it’s true that politicians will then go home and say, ‘This is a great law. The problem is solved.’ And it’s also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we’ll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal.”
    -Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc.(HCI), “A Reporter At Large: Handguns,” The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58

    HCI changed in name only to the Brady Campaign in 2001.

    In 2008 Brady brief supported the DC gun ban.

  5. Harvey, sorry for the long delay in getting back to you. I saw you comment and postponed responding to it because I had no idea what you were talking about. After reading my posts over and over I still don’t. I have no interest in taking your guns. Are you sure you read my stuff correctly?

Comments are closed.