Picking A Fight With The N.R.A.

By Viveca Novak

Tom Selleck went on the Rosie O'Donnell show last week to plug his new movie, The Love Letter. Instead he co-starred in a little drama that was more like Gunfight at the O.K. Corral. After a hug and a few niceties, she broached the topic of firearms, and what ensued wasn't exactly friendly fire.

"There's no reason, in my opinion, to have [guns]," O'Donnell stated, pouncing on Selleck, the former Magnum PI star, who recently appeared in an ad for the National Rifle Association. "You can't say, 'I will not take responsibility for anything the N.R.A. represents' if you're doing an ad," O'Donnell lectured. "I think you're being stupid," a slumped and sullen Selleck replied at one point. "You're questioning my humanity."

You know you're in trouble when the Queen of Nice loses her cool over you on daytime TV. It didn't get any better for the N.R.A. the next day, when the news broke that a Georgia student had opened fire on his schoolmates on the one-month anniversary of the Littleton tragedy. Hours later the Senate approved the most significant gun-control proposals in six years, including a measure to require background checks for buyers at gun shows.

And so the N.R.A.'s downhill slide went last week, much as it has gone for months. City after city--nine, with more expected--has filed suit against the firearms industry seeking damages for gun mayhem. Last month, after pouring $3.7 million into the effort, the lobby lost a major battle on a Missouri referendum over allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons. The Littleton tragedy then exposed a rift between the N.R.A. and gunmakers, who were willing to support Clinton proposals like raising the minimum age for buying a gun to 21. After that, the N.R.A. found itself embarrassed when its point man in the Senate, Larry Craig, steered his G.O.P. colleagues onto the rocks during the battle over the gun-show amendment.

However, while pro-gun control Senators like Charles Schumer of New York argue that "the momentum has shifted" in favor of gun control, Democrats behind the scenes aren't so sure. "That's manure," said a leading House Democratic staff member. He and others haven't forgotten how in 1994 the N.R.A. knocked out two of the party's giants, Speaker Tom Foley and Judiciary Committee chairman Jack Brooks, over their support for the assault-weapons ban. And they note that rural, pro-gun districts have more clout in the House. Then there's the N.R.A.'s well-funded PAC and its soft-money donations. Majority leader Dick Armey and whip Tom DeLay each got $9,900 in their most recent elections; 178 House members were on the N.R.A.'s recipient list as it distributed $1.63 million in all, with an additional $350,000 in soft money going to the Republican Party. So House members aren't thrilled to be jumping into a gun-control debate. The same day the Senate was voting on the gun-show provision, House Republican leaders canceled a markup of an important spending bill after Democrats made it known they would offer gun-control amendments.

By week's end, the N.R.A. had Rosie on the run, having posted news of her exchange with Selleck on its website along with phone numbers for registering complaints with both her and K Mart. (O'Donnell appears in ads for the chain, one of America's largest gun retailers.) After a barrage of calls, she issued three apologies on successive days. "While I don't recommend the purchase or use of guns of any type, it is legal in America to be a responsible gun owner or seller," she said Friday. Proving once again that the N.R.A. is not going quietly.

--By Viveca Novak