KINDER'S COMMENTARY: MISSOURI DEMOCRATS JOIN CONGRESSIONAL GOP ON GUN CONTROL

News media accounts constantly inform us these days that Americans demand more gun control. Curious thing, though: Away from the polls, there are -- pols. The elected pols, that is, who make it their business to know their constituents' views and expectations.

Americans awakened to news Friday morning that the House of Representatives handed President Clinton a stinging defeat late Thursday night on the issue of gun control. What is interesting is that the winning margin came from the 45 House Democrats who joined most Republicans, including all Missouri Republicans, in voting for an amendment sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich. Dingell's amendment, loosening restrictions on gun shows, goes in exactly the opposite direction that the president wants.

Dingell, who had earlier promised that 38 Democrats would vote with him, is the senior Democrat among all his party's House membership and a longtime member of the board of directors of the National Rifle Association. Watching a television news clip, you could see the frustration in the eyes of House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt as he knew he couldn't blame this one on his evil Republican foes.

Missourians should know that two Show Me State lawmakers were among the 45 Democrats voting with the NRA, and for the rights of law-abiding gun owners, for the Dingell amendment. Ike Skelton, D-Lexington, and Pat Danner, D-Platte City, both voted with Dingell. Savvy politicos from both parties have long known that the reason Skelton and Danner have proven unbeatable through long careers, and will hold their seats until voluntary retirement, is that they faithfully reflect the moderate-conservative views of their constituents.

Watch for lots of media temper tantrums over the House's failure to bow to the dictates of the liberal editorial writers and pundits. Meanwhile, for law-abiding gun owners who cherish this bulwark of American liberty: Remember who your friends are, and who stood with you when the heat was on amid hysterical pressure to jettison your Second Amendment rights.

* * * * *

"Those who would forfeit liberty to gain a little temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." -- Benjamin Franklin

* * * * *

No evidence for gun control: Writing in The Wall Street Journal, scholar John Lott, of the University of Chicago, asks:

"Would stricter gun laws reduce crime by taking guns out of the hands of criminals? Not one academic study has shown that waiting periods and background checks have reduced crime or youth violence. The Brady bill, widely touted by its supporters as a landmark in gun control has produced virtually no convictions in five years. And no wonder: Disarming potential victims (those likely to obey gun laws) relative to criminals (those who almost by definition won't obey such laws) makes crime more attractive and more likely."

There is, writes Dr. Lott, "no evidence that gun regulations prevent crime, and plenty of indications that they actually encourage it ... 290 scholars from institutions as diverse as Harvard, Stanford, Northwestern and UCLA released and open letter to Congress ... stating that proposed new gun laws are ill-advised: `With the 20,000 gun laws already on the books, we advise Congress, before enacting yet more new laws, to investigate whether many ... existing laws may have contributed to the problems we currently face."

~Peter Kinder is assistant to the president of Rust Communications and a state senator from Cape Girardeau.