In his editorial ("Keeping Guns Away From Terrorists," 10/25/01, Wash. Post), Mr. Holder cites the example of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack to justify the need to "tighten our nation's gun laws." He proclaims "there is an easy and safe solution" for keeping firearms out of the hands of terrorists in the United States. You would think the Sept. 11 attack used firearms rather than box cutter knives or that the follow-on attacks were with firearms rather than anthrax.

So, what problem is Mr. Holder trying to solve? Is it the same problem he was trying to solve when he called for closing gun control loopholes (Washington Post letter to editor, 7/7/99 and "Correcting the myth about background checks for guns," Washington Times, 6/28/99)? If so, he's not trying to do anything about terrorism, he's selling gun control and the problem he's trying to fix is guns in the hands of the people. Mr. Holder has become a one-note band -- whatever the real problem is, the fix is more gun control.

His "easy and safe" gun control solution is to require background checks on all gun sales, adding checks to see whether the buyer is on a terrorist watch list, and registering all firearms with the BATF. In making such statements, Mr. Holder continues a march of folly on gun control and disregards a number of unpalatable facts proving that it won't help public safety such as:

Mr. Holder cites the example of Osama bin Laden buying a gun from unlicensed dealers at gun shows because the law does not require background checks for such sales. But how does Osama bin Laden managed even to be in this country much less attend a gun show? If Osama bin Laden used a false identity good enough to pass our border checks, how would a licensed dealer stop him from purchasing a firearm?

Really, how difficult could it be for Osama bin Laden to get a false ID as did many of the Sept. 11 attackers? A GAO experiment succeeded 100% in buying guns using fake IDs ("Lying & Buying, Using False Information to Obtain Firearms," Prepared for Rep. Henry A. Waxman, March 21, 2001) -- now that's a shock, isn't it? The GAO says that fake IDs are used in 13% of the ATF trafficking cases involving criminals who buy guns. Does Mr. Holder expect Osama bin Laden to present a driver's license with his true name when he goes to buy his gun? Oh, I'll bet Mr. Holder will want to close the ID loophole too -- anyone for a national ID card?

Britain has some of the strongest gun laws in the world today and private citizens are denied ownership of handguns. Even to own a long gun requires a license. Despite these controls there have been sharp increases in shootings by criminal gangs ("Yardies at War on our doorsteps," Justin Davenport, 10/9/01, http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/). Gangs find it easy to smuggle firearms into the island nation of Britain. If it isn't difficult for criminals to smuggle firearms, it can't be difficult for terrorists. Even machine guns are readily available in Britain now (to criminals, not decent citizens).

British police recently raided an illegal gun manufacturing factory (see "Factory 'making weapons from fake guns'," Matt Keating, 7/8/01, The Guardian). If criminal gangs can establish their own manufacturing facility to supply guns, a serious terrorist gang like bin Laden's could too.

J. Ludwig and P. Cook have published a scientific study in JAMA (v284#5, Aug. 2, 2000) analyzing the effects of the Brady Act and concluded that it has had no detectable impact on overall homicide rates and suicide rates. How can we expect otherwise since the people we wish to keep away from guns (criminals and terrorists) don't obey our laws. [NB: More importantly in 2003, the CDC admitted that there was no scientific basis to claim gun controls reduced violence]

Nearly 3000 people are dead because terrorist used knives -- not guns. A few more are dead from an attack using anthrax as a weapon -- not guns. Three thousand people are dead because the victims on the aircraft were unprepared to resist and the government didn't have a cop available to stop the attack. And Mr. Holder wants to make it even more difficult for victims to resist.

We should not listen to proposals that will be so ineffective in making decent citizens safe.