In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

New gun safety law under fire

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited January 2002 in General Discussion
New gun safety law under fire By Mary Shaffrey THE WASHINGTON TIMES A new gun-control law that takes effect tomorrow will force Maryland customers to watch a two-hour movie on gun safety before buying a firearm - a requirement that draws hoots from critics, who say it will do nothing to prevent gun crime or violence. "It is one of the most meaningless bits of legislation ever passed by the Maryland legislature, [Democratic Gov. Parris N.] Glendening and his gun-control people" said Carl Roy, president of the Maryland Small Arms Range Inc. in Upper Marlboro, which drew a large number of practice shooters yesterday. "A cadaver could come in here and watch the video, and it would not make a difference," he said. Law-enforcement officers and those in the military or with honorable discharges do not have to take what the new law describes as a "firearms safety training course." There is no test after the video and no time allotted for follow-up questions, which is one of the faults of the law, said Michael D. Cassidy, a firearms instructor who works at the range. He is certified to teach gun safety by the National Rifle Association. "When I finish my course, I easily have 20 or 30 basic questions that people ask," said Mr. Cassidy. "This [law] is just a waste of time." As of yesterday, Mr. Roy, who sells guns and ammunition at his range, said the state had not given him any information about how or where the video will be shown, or what the video will teach - or what the range instructors are supposed to say if the job of showing the video falls on their shoulders. Maryland has one of the more restrictive gun-ownership policies in the country, including regulations on gun casings, gun locks and, now, purchasing requirements. One shooting enthusiast said the old expression about the road to ruin being paved with good intentions applies to Maryland's gun laws. "The law [already] says you are required to buy a lock for your handgun, but they don't show you how to use it, and for all they know, once you leave you can just keep the lock in the plastic bag and never put it on the gun - what good does that do?" said Roxanne Fus of Silver Spring, who was target shooting with her family yesterday. "Or you can just come back the next day and return [the handgun lock] and get your money back," said Danielle Fus, 19, who joined her parents and sister at the range for recreational shooting. Mr. Roy confirmed that Miss Fus was correct. The law requires only that customers buy the locks at the same time they buy their guns. It does not require them to keep the locks. In addition to this bill, the Maryland legislature this year overwhelmingly passed a law, which Mr. Glendening vetoed, that would have made Maryland the first state to require public schools to teach gun safety from kindergarten through 12th grade. The bill stipulated that educators would work with the NRA and other gun organizations to create gun-safety courses for middle and high school students, including taking them to local gun ranges. "This bill would create a clear appearance of the state encouraging young people to handle weapons and potentially furthering their interest in a time when we are trying to fight the scourge of gun violence," Mr. Glendening said at the time. This is the type of course that Mr. Roy and Miss Fus said was needed. When she bought her first gun, Miss Fus took a monthlong course at the Izzak Walton League, which required her to attend classes once a week for several hours to familiarize herself with the gun. Some gun enthusiasts, however, say a two-hour movie is better than nothing. "While there is no interaction, it's still more information than you would have had before," said Steve Moskowitz of College Park. http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20011231-19801480.htm
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • will270winwill270win Member Posts: 4,845
    edited November -1
    I like the school part, but the video is a stupid idea.
    Eat healthy, exercise, avoid smoking........Die anyway. will270win@aol.com ~Secret Select Society Of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets~
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • robsgunsrobsguns Member Posts: 4,581 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I can teach ANYONE in 15 minutes how to safely handle a weapon. That is not to say FIRE it, but SAFELY HANDLE it. No video can teach anyone to fire all weapons, only instruct them on a weapons functions and controls, and then it would only be specific to one to three weapons, at the most. It seems to be a waste of time to me also. Anyway, most people tune a video out in the first 3 minutes its running anyway, if they have to watch it and dont want to watch it.
    SSgt Ryan E. Roberts, USMC
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Another fine example of LEOS being exempt from gun control laws.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    7mmultramagisking-Are you suggesting that a 2 hour film viewing should be a requirement before you are able to purchase a gun? You are from Pennsylvania-are you aware that there is no such film or a safety course requirement to carry a firearm concealed in our great state, much less a 2 hour video requirement before you are even allowed to buy a gun? Do you see rampant misuse, accidents, acts of negligence with a firearm in the state of Pennsylvania?I have no statistic to back this up, but I would bet that 90 percent of people who choose to buy or carry a gun, realize that they should get some training for their new purchase(my training when first purchasing a handgun involved going to the range, and having some of the "regulars" show me the ropes ).And my shooting range has many classes that are attended often by first time owners, all without a law telling them the "have " to to take a course. And as far as police and leos being exempt: There are a few topics floating on this board right now that deal with police using or storing their guns in a negligent manner. Even with there "required" training, they still screw up! And if they can screw up, even with their training, I do not see why they should be exempt from gun control laws.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    Too bad that R.I. swat team member didn't watch the Maryland video before he assumed his weapon wasn't loaded.
    Lord Lowrider the LoquaciousMember:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets She was only a fisherman's daughter,But when she saw my rod she reeled.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • njretcopnjretcop Member Posts: 7,975
    edited November -1
    salzo my good friend, there you go again. The regulation states law enforcement officers, those in the military and those with honorable discharges are exempt. You choose to point out that it is only law enforcement officers. Therefore your irrational prejudice against law enforcement is rearing it's head again.I still love you like a brother and want more than ever to have that coffee with you.Perhaps at a show this year, we can discuss it. WE ARE NOT YOUR ENEMY! No doubt something transpired in your past with law enforcement that has made you so bias. One more thing, when we meet again, I won't even tell you about the fact that NJ issues two different CCW's. One to civilians, and another one to retired law enforcement officers that exempts them from all the places civilians can't carry No, I did not write the law either buddy -Charlie, Sal's friend
    It's the stuff dreams are made of AngelMember: NRA, RKBA, NJSPBA, NJ area rep for the 2AMPD and the AARP. njretcop@copmail.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    OH COME ON CHARLIE!!! I was not leaving them (military, honorably discharged) out! I just consider them LEOS. If we keep making gun laws that LEOS(military included)are exempt from, you can bet that eventually the military will be used as LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.Salzo (Charlies "coffeeless" friend)
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Charlie- One more thing:I do not have a problem with LEOS(all varieties). What I have a problem with, is when LEOS are not restricted the same way that the general public is with respect to firearms.When one considers that the second amendments main purpose was to prevent standing armies from being used on the people, I cant help but be concerned when members of the LEO community are allowed to have weapons, magazines,etc, that the general public is not allowed to have. I am more aggravated by the rights restrictions placed on the general public than the fact that LEOS are exempt from these restrictions. However, I have to wonder why government does not feel the need to prevent government employees from arming themselves in any way that they see fit.In a nutshell:Government cannot make laws with respect to firearms. Government makes firearms laws anyway, that everyone has to obey EXCEPT government employees(police, judges, etc).I think that is something that we should be concerned about.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • gunpaqgunpaq Member Posts: 4,607 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Let me get my two cents in. I reapplied for my carry permit in PA several years ago and all I had to do was fill out some forms and wait for approval then was issued my permit. No training required no evidence of prior training or experience required. This is a little scary since carrying is an awsome responsibility and someone simply with a clean background who has never fired a weapon before qualifies to carry - I know such an individual. Fortunately we are a responsible people, for the majority. I don't want to see any more regulations or restrictions but a basic firearms course should be highly recommended prior to applying for a carry permit. Concerning the operation of an 80,000# weapon on the highways - PA grandfathered a lot of drivers in several years ago by just simply taking a multiple choice test for the new CDL. I have driven most all kinds of trucks but never a passenger bus, but my license says I can. Of course a responsible person would not engage in any activity of consequence without sufficient training. My point is that the state obviously assumes that we the people are somewhat responsible when issuing these permits and licenses. Lets enjoy this freedom while it lasts.
    Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'm sorry, no video or training course I have ever seen or done, regardless of length, can compare to five minutes of watching and learning from my old man (or his). The courses are arbitrary and forced, and are a complete waste of time (and money- in MA I had to pay $400 for an LTC course). The point is that NO GOVERNMENT TRAINING COURSES, REGISTRATION, OR LICENSING will ever keep criminals from using guns, or keep kids from picking up guns and using them. I am sorry to hear about kids doing that, but it is the job of parents to teach their kids about guns if they have concerns, not the government.As far as LEOS are concerned, it does seem a bit stupid that there are exemptions. In our form of government, no one should be above the law, no matter how stupid the law is.
    The definition of an "expert":An "X" is an unknown quantity and a "spurt" is a drip under pressure.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    7mmultramagisking- Would I feel safe around a city slicker who decides to carry without benefit of training? I would and I do. I know a few Philadelphians who got carry permits, all without benefit of training. One of them, was mugged three times before he finally got a permit to carry. Philadelphia makes it a bit difficult to get a permit, so he got one in the county where his mother lived. He did go to the range AFTER getting his pistol, and AFTER getting his permit to carry. A few months after getting a permit, someone tried to mug him. The mugger is now dead, 4 shots to the chest usually does that to you.It should not be the responsibility of the state to make sure that people who carry are safe. It is the responsibility of the person who carries to make sure he is safe. And I am sure the vast majority of people who choose to carry live up to that responsibility.There is absolutely no way a state can be certain that a person that passes a state mandated test, or watches a state mandated film, will be safe to carry. There is no way a state should assume that a LEO who goes through training, will never have a firearm accident, or will store their firearm responsibly, based on the fact that he was trained by the state. There are too many real life stories to prove otherwise.You seem to suggest that the right that is guaranteed in our Pennsylvania constitution is subjective, and not a right at all, just a guide line. You are in company with the antis, though they might think it is more subjective than you do.I do not buy into the Hollywood portrayal of first time gun owners who are walking accidents waiting to happen. Most first time gun owners are not accurately represented by Hollywood.Here is a little Hollywood:A girl from Maryland is dating a boy from Pennsylvania. The boy likes guns, and frequently goes to the range. The girl starts going to the range with the boy, and she becomes quite good at shooting. The girl breaks up with the boy, and the boy, a loose cannon, says he will kill her. The girl decides she better get a gun. The girl goes to the local gun shop to buy a gun, but is told that she has to watch a film about gun safety first. She informs the owner that she knows how to handle a gun, but that does not matter-she has to watch a movie if she wants to buy a gun. The girl agrees, and the owner of the store tells her the next "showing" of the required cinema is next weekend. She needs the gun now. "Cant get the gun, until you come back and watch the film"The girl signs up for the movie. Girl goes home. Girl goes into her apartment, where boy is waiting for her. He made a copy of her key before he returned the key to her.Boy shoots the girl dead.Now you might think this is extreme and improbable, but it is more probably than the hollywood portrayal of first time gun owners causing harm by their "inexperience" with guns.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    DANO- HEHEHE! Too bad Dano is unable to provide any windmills to take on SALZO.TO DREAM THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    If gun ownership is a granted constitutional right, then the exercising of that right is only contingent on being a citizen, not on taking some stupid course thought up by Governor Glendening (who couldn't get a trigger lock off a gun on t.v.).
    The definition of an "expert":An "X" is an unknown quantity and a "spurt" is a drip under pressure.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    7mmultramag- What am I scared of? I am scared of any anti constitutional action.The Pennsylvania constitution says The right of the people to keep and bear arms for themselves and for the state shall not be questioned. Requiring someone to have to watch a movie is questioning that right. It is very simple. You approach it as something that is subject to some questioning. Why do you think that your questioning is correct, or your questioning passes constitutional muster? Explain to me why you think your questioning is OK, but the guy who thinks that people should not be allowed to carry is not OK. It says what it says, and I just assume not allow anyone to feel it is appropriate to put limitations, or decide what limitations can be on a very specific law. You say, "require a course!" the antis say "do not allow anyone to carry". Why do you think they are wrong and you are right? If you go by what the constitution says, you are both wrong! And I would just assume, go by what the law says, which states the right shall not be questioned. You want to leave the law up to opinion? Well you know what they say about opinions. Forget the opinions, and go by what the law says.You say that they can take a foot-the antis say they can take a yard. If we are going to base it on how much "questioning" is ok, then everyone and anyone is correct.And answer this ultra mag. Do you think it iwould be appropriate for the state of Pennsylvania to require a movie before you are allowed to purchase a firearm? You really believe that that would pass constitutional muster in the state of Pennsylvania? Because if you do, then the arms right guaranteed in the state of Pennsylvania means nothing!And by the way, I never said training is not necessary, nor did I say you should not have training.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Giving in to the left will do nothing for us. History has repeatedly shown that doing things just to appease the left only results in more "giving in".You seem to be unraveled because I equated you with an anti. Forgive me, but you did use the "if it saves one life" defense. If that does not sound like Schumer, Kennedy, McCarthy rhetoric than I do not know what does."Trigger Locks-If it saves one life.""High capacity Magazines-If it saves one life""Gun Registration-If it saves one life""Prohibition of hand guns-if it saves one life"Ultramag- I do not know why you would need a 7mmultra mag to hunt deer or bear in the state of Pennsylvania. All you need is a 3030, or at the most an -06. So I think such a high power rifle should be illegal in this state. I mean you dont need it to hunt deer or bear in PA, so you should not be allowed to own it in PA. Someone could use that as a sniper rifle, so they should be outlawed-and if it saves one life.....
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Saxon- Are you at all familiar with the gun control laws of Maryland. You are barely able to buy a gun in that state. The idea that the state of Maryland is instituting a gun control law for any other reason than to prevent and discourage firearm use and ownership is ludicrous.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Voluntary classes are a great idea. I would like it if everyone who owned a gun would take a class. I don't want it mandated. When you rationalize the infringement of constitutional rights in any way, you need to reevaluate what you are saying. Who says what is reasonable? No, you can't be subjective and talk about giving in. You have to go by the text.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    C'mon Salzo, think of the children...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    7mmultramag- No you are not acting like me. You are acting just as every gun stealing, anti right to bear arms organization does. You cannot at all back up your opinions with any type of fact. Your opinion is totally based on your "feelings"(nothing more than...feelings...sing along with me ultramag) And then when your feelings are hurt with facts and commonsense, you attack and ridicule with insults, misrepresentations and out right lies.You are an imposter ultramag. You are an anti trolling this board."IF IT SAVES ONE LIFE????" puleasse.Anyone who feels it appropriate to shoot litlle animals with such a big rifle, should not be allowed to own guns.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • spec.4spec.4 Member Posts: 897 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I would like to put my two cents in this matter because I live in this p--- poor state of Maryland. I feel this law is about wasting the honest people time. Near me was a shooting on Christmas eve in Laurel, Md., when a 5 or 6 year old found a 357 mag. under the bed of the apt. owner and shoot his brother in the head and killed him instantly. First thing that I notice was that the owner did not have any other weapons at the house. Must of us have more then one weapon(rifles, shotguns, and handguns),and we are very careful about them, then a one weapon owner. We even teach our kids that these weapon that we have is not a TOY! Second, that kids had access to the weapon. What kind of adults leave a loaded weapon under their bed when kids are in the house when they are not there. When I have kids over, I unload my weapon and put it up in different location, LOCK UP. All other weapon have trigger locks or cable locks. Third, why was the kids home alone, most shooting accrued when the adults are away from the home. Has anyone notice this too? This law are full of crap and I am sick and tired of the dumb--- telling us what we can and not do, when we are doing it safe. It is the ones who do not think, screwed the ones that does. I think that there should be a class on how to use, clean, and store it when it is and when it is not in use. Thank God I have only a four to five more years before I return home to Pyatt, Arkansas.
    Don't fear the night, fear what hunt at night. ME!!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Ultramag- WOW!! Thats one heck of an oratory ultramag. I am speechless!!Let me know when you are planning on leaving the board. I will throw a going away party for you.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.