Armed and in the Middle
Moderation, said Oscar Wilde, is a fatal thing. That was certainly true for the career of Richard Feldman. In his upcoming book, Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist, Feldman discusses a careening life that transformed him from gun control supporter to lobbyist for the National Rifle Association and at least part of the way back again. Eight years following his ouster as head of the American Shooting Sports Council after compromising with President Clinton on child safety locks, Feldman says the public is being poorly served by the activists on both sides of the gun debate.
How long have you been a gun owner?
Ever since my very first year in law school. That would make it 1979. I bought my first gun, a .38 special, which I still own.
Why so late?
I'm originally from Long Island, and if you had asked me prior to 1979 [if I] was for gun control, I would probably have answered, "Of course, every reasonable person is for gun control." Because I made the mistake that millions of Americans make. I equated gun control to crime control.
When did you start working for the NRA?
In the summer of '84. In '91, in fact the day Wayne LaPierre was named executive vice president of NRA, I was named executive director of the American Shooting Sports Council, which was then the firearm industry's trade association for government relations. I did that until '99, when I was ousted, by the NRA in large measure.
How did you run afoul of the NRA?
I could see the [gun] lawsuits coming, and I knew that in the industry I represented there were a lot of things we could do that were easy. Installing child safety locks was not only easy, but it was a step whose time had come. Rather than having legislation mandating how we had to do it, it made more sense for us to just do it on our own.
The NRA was just eager for a fight over child safety locks and it didn't make any sense to me from a PR position or from an industry position. After all, the industry made money selling product, the NRA makes money selling the issue. The NRA needs the Brady Campaign [a gun control group] just as badly as the Brady Campaign needs the NRA.
But the NRA has continued to gain ground. Doesn't that speak well of its refusal to compromise?
It's been a combination of tactics and timing. There's a certain element of luck in all this. I think in large measure the war has been won, but the NRA refused to accept congratulations. They would much prefer to fight pitched battles.
Do you think the Virginia Tech shootings will lead to stricter gun measures?
No. As the story fades from the front page and as the presidential primary really heats up, I think this issue is going to fade. But the next issue is going to be the gun show issue. Look, if [Seung Hui] Cho hadn't been able to buy the guns from gun shops, and he was determined to cause the mayhem that he did, he would have gone to a gun show.
Why haven't background checks at gun shows become mandatory?
Here's an example of where both sides overreach. The NRA will say, "This is an interference with legitimate citizens selling guns, and some people are going to get denied." The only people who are going to get denied at a gun show are going to be people who probably should be denied. But the antigun community wants to make all transfers of all guns subject to licensing and registration. It's foolish. There are four kinds of individuals that I would ever sell a gun to-a friend, a relative, a neighbor, or a coworker. I'd call 911 so fast if someone came to my door saying, "I'm looking to buy guns."
Could changes in the law have prevented the Virginia Tech shootings?
Every day in this country, citizens do protect themselves. When we have these so-called gun-free school zones, who are they gun free of? Of the people we shouldn't be worried about. I'm not arguing in favor of arming students but the teachers. A lot of those professors, I bet, owned guns.
Is it possible to tone down the rhetoric on both sides?
It's very difficult. The NRA has been through this before, and they know how to play the issue out until it's off the front pages. I think it requires a group in the middle. Most Americans are middle of the road on most issues, but how can you make money off the middle? There's no one to represent the best interests of the American people.
Do you think this issue will figure prominently in the presidential election?
There was already a pretty good fight months ago going on up here [in New Hampshire] on the gun issue between Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and John McCain. So it's certainly already an issue in the Republican primaries. I think there's going to be a lot more debate than I would have expected a year ago, but I think everybody's going to be hedging their bets and looking not to alienate [NRA supporters].
This story appears in the May 21, 2007 print edition of U.S. News & World Report.