A little off the top

Ethan Smith

2008 will be the most important presidential election year in the history of mankind, according to the National Rifle Association, since, well, since Clinton was running for office.

No, the other Clinton. The one who had too much sex, not to be confused with the one who looks like she's not having any, who's running in 2008.

I know, it's hard to keep them apart. Besides Hillary, there's a whole host of other liberals who will probably take your guns away if they get a chance, according to the NRA, unless a good die-hard conservative Republican wins.

I was reading the latest doom and gloom from the NRA while on a pheasant hunting trip with my dad. Some of our hunting buddies are very active NRA members, probably because they live in a part of the country where they really do face potential restrictions on their right to own guns.

It's hard to imagine that's a problem here in Montana, where you can go to some gun shows — which are technically classified as something similar to a craft bazaar — and buy guns without even showing ID. Cash on the spot, no background check, and it's all perfectly legal.

I bought a .357 Magnum at the Polson gun show two years ago in this way. One of the county's then-undercover drug task force members was standing right beside me at the time, and I asked him if it bothered him that you could walk into one of these shows and buy a gun, no questions asked, with cash and not undergo a background check to see if you are a convicted felon.

"It bothers me a little," he said.

I don't blame him. Like many law-abiding gun owners, I do believe in some minor restrictions on gun ownership, and convicted felons are probably a good group of people to deny gun ownership to. But somewhere between Montana's laws and the rest of the country, there's a lot of variation in ownership laws, and for that, the NRA is firmly on the side of responsible gun ownership, safety, hunting ethics and other good things.

I believe in those things, too. Somehow, though, the NRA, like other advocacy groups, is forced to take extreme positions, just in hopes of maintaining some middle ground in the war over gun owners' rights.

The NRA magazines I was looking through routinely pick up news items from around the country, about how someone found someone breaking into their house, and shot the intruder. I'd have to say I'd consider the same thing if I ever felt threatened.

But they never run articles about law abiding people whose children find their guns lying out and accidentally shoot themselves, or articles about how many guns are used in domestic disputes or drunken arguments by people who are legally allowed to own them. It's not that the NRA advocates that kind of gun usage, of course, it's just that there's always two sides to an issue, and pointing out that tens of thousands of guns are used inappropriately by people legally entitled to own them would hurt their position while they lobby for the rest of us.

Somewhere, most of us are stuck in the middle. We want the right to own guns, but can at least acknowledge that too much freedom can be a bad thing when guns fall into the wrong hands. I'm not talking about drug dealers or convicted felons — I'm talking about your neighbor who beats up his wife, or the guy with severe anger management problems, or the habitual drunk who gets loaded every night and has a small arsenal around the house.

Are they the NRA too? Am I, just because I hunt occasionally?

I was thinking about this while enjoying a fun weekend with my dad, the way responsible hunters around the state did last week. Of course, if you bag a trophy buck, that's great, but hunting is also about bonding and camping and just being in the great outdoors. Many hunters returned from the big game opening day last weekend without bagging anything, but I'll bet most of them would say they had a great time anyway.

And that's the way I felt with my dad. But we are pretty far removed from the NRA's core group of constituents, I would imagine. It's funny, though, how each presidential election causes the NRA to wring their hands in fear, and send out fundraising solicitations telling people that THIS election year is the worst one they've seen. Ever. Since some Chinese guy invented gunpowder.

It seems to work. I have a friend with a federal firearm license who stockpiles guns in the year prior to a presidential election, and then sells them in the months leading up to that November because no matter who is running, the market value always goes up, he said.

On some level, people apparently get insecure about possible changes in firearms ownership laws, and start buying more guns than normal. There's some anecdotal evidence to support their fears.

During the Clinton administration, when there were numerous restrictions on certain types of "assault" weapons, that really did impact people's ability to own guns though. So maybe the NRA is on to something.

All I know is that you non-felons who make up the other 56 percent of our readers — we do market studies — can purchase almost any type of gun you want, short of fully automatic, here in Montana. For all the doom and gloom that the NRA preaches, it seems far away here in Montana.

For me, gun ownership means just being able to go to the shooting range for some fun stress relief, or the occasional pheasant hunting trip with my dad. I associate gun ownership more with outdoor activities than I do lobbying and fundraisers.

But with the 2008 election just around the corner, I guess I'll go down to the corner store and get me an assault rifle. That way, if Hillary gets elected, I'll sell it for a 35 percent profit.

Come to think of it, for Hillary's sake, maybe I'd better hold onto it.