S.397 Passed But At What Price?
The Senate has passed S397, the legislation to protect firearms manufacturers, distributors and sellers from the lawsuits the anti-gun crowd is using in attempting to enact gun-control through judicial activism and ultimately to bankrupt our side. Seriously folks you don’t sue Ford for the actions of a drunk driver but that’s exactly the type of lawsuits that are being pushed, often with the assistance of local governemts who are still hungry after sinking their teeth into the Tabacco dollars.
But getting S397 passed has once again shown that the Republican leadership in the Senate is spineless, incompetent or worse, And at the forefront of this is Indiana’s own Senator Lugar (which comes as no surprise to me I’m afraid).
Frist should have stood firm and let any rats jumping ship go home and explain to their constituents why they didn’t support needed tort reform.
But he did not, and the trigger lock amendment passed. Those who think it’s no big deal will tell you that even though the provision requires gun dealers to include the sale of a “lock-up-your-safety” device with every handgun sold, there are no penalties for the gun owner if he or she does not use the trigger lock. Right. NOT YET.
Remember seat belts? First they had to be installed in every new car sold. Then, it became mandatory that you wear them. You can almost hear the debate in the next Congress: “It does no good to provide trigger locking devices if gun owners aren’t required to use them. We need to punish any gun owner who fails to lock up his or her handgun!”
Remember also that some us don’t like a “tax” on the price of our next gun, which we have to pay to get a piece of equipment we know can endanger our lives should we install it.
While some may think requiring the locks isn’t bad be aware that few manufacturers don’t include them these days and if you buy from a big store like Gander Mountain they’ll even give you one when you purchase a used firearm. So what’s wrong with that? Besides the seatbelt analogy given by GOW, which is very accurate, there is also the cost. A lock worth dragging home is going to cost dollars and someone has to pay it. So it’s yet one more tax on firearms owners on top of the sales tax and excise tax, as it is now every firearm a Hoosier buys has 17% tax on it. Now add a $15 gun lock.
Every single compromise is a net loss for gun owners and the rights of all Americans and while they moan and complain about Bush’s security policies and the Patriot Act they gleefully force this on us. And anyone who believes there is a difference is ignorant.
Ultimately though the tort reform was critical to the survival of the industry. There is a chance the Gun Lock provision will get stripped out in committee. But I’m not holding my breath and expecting to put out a few extra dollars for my next purchase.
August 5th, 2005 at 9:06 pm
reading the senate version of the bill, as found here in pdf
http://www.hsshf.org/share/PLCAA/S397.pdf
it’s a bit dry, but noting in summary by interesting point, rather than section, that:
1.) child safety locks are not required in handgun transfer except from liscensed dealer.
2.) such device not required in transfer of a C&R handgun.
3.) a person who has lawful posession and uses such device is entitled to immunity.
3.1.) (if a guy steals my unlocked gun, shoots somebody with it, i could be sued)
4.) the AG shall conduct a study to determine whether uniform standard for testing of projectiles against body armour is feasible.
4.1.) considered: variations in performance related to length of barrel of handgun or rifle from which projectile is fired.
4.2.) the amount of powder used to propel…
so…
1.) nothing new here
2.) some relief
3.) some relief
3.1.) lock em up, for your protection
4.) it’s a study, with recommendations to be considered, possibly adopted by administrative law.
4.1.) seems to indicate that projectiles only to be considered in earlier language, but this muddies the waters. seems to allow a projectile to be identified as multi-use. probably would result in steel core and such being identified as armour peircing if acheiving certain velocity…
4.2.) more mud, written by somemone who knows nothing about amunition.
this is not so bad. things could be a lot worse. buy AP projectiles now, if that’s your thing, and load them before the bill is passed. don’t sell them to anybody. the law applies to person, as well as manufacturer.
would be nice if section 6 was stripped, but prolly gonna pass intact.