(GA) Bill is about children, not guns

[Drizzt]

The Atlanta Journal and Constitution


February 11, 2003 Tuesday Home Edition

SECTION: Editorial; Pg. 12A

LENGTH: 349 words

HEADLINE: OUR OPINIONS: Bill is about children, not guns

SOURCE: AJC

BODY:
Based on the two hours of testimony, you'd have assumed that the House Judiciary Committee meeting Monday was about a gun endangerment law rather than one on child endangerment. The welfare of children scarcely came up as witnesses and lawmakers talked about protecting the rights of gun owners, including adults who put a loaded pistol on the coffee table near a 3-year-old.

Presented that very scenario, state Rep. Brian Joyce (R-Lookout Mountain) testified that the gun owner should not be prosecuted if the toddler ended up hurt or killed. "This legislation will be used whenever possible to go after gun owners," said Joyce. That misrepresentation explains why prosecutors and child advocates have been unable to get the Georgia Legislature to pass a child endangerment law for four years. The lack of a law undermines prosecutors seeking justice for children who die as a result of glaring negligence by a parent or guardian. Some examples are parents who leave their toddlers to die in hot baths or suffocate in cars.

Those real-life cases didn't faze critics, who only wanted to talk about how the law infringed on gun rights.

These aren't the sentiments of most gun owners, who understand that a child endangerment law poses no threat to responsible gun ownership and that securing guns from children is important. Even the National Rifle Association representative testified that the NRA wasn't opposed to the bill.

"This bill is about protecting children from brutalities," said child advocate and former prosecutor Kelly Crisp. "It's about saving children's lives and preventing serious injury."

To that end, Gov. Sonny Perdue ought to embrace the bill; he made child protection a campaign cornerstone. Perdue spokeswoman Erin O'Brien said Monday the governor supported the concept, but had problems with "the provisions, nuances and language" of the House bill.

If so, then Perdue ought to work with lawmakers to improve the bill. And he also ought to make it clear that the mainstream GOP is not so extreme on gun rights that it would sacrifice child safety.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What else would you expect from the AJC?

 

[jmbg29]

"This bill is about protecting children from brutalities," said child advocate and former prosecutor Kelly Crisp. "It's about saving children's lives and preventing serious injury."

Sounds like Kelly might be smoking mentholated Crack. Bad stuff you know, causes delusions. Next thing you know, the smoker believes that a piece of paper with fancy gobbledy-gook on it will "protect" or "save" someone. :banghead:

Kelly, if you simply must smoke Crack, try the Crack lite-100s or the Crack patch.

Stupid !

Write a law telling negligent people not to be negligent.

Sounds like an exercise they would give to a prisoner in a psychological torture camp. :banghead:

 

[Drjones]

One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation.

- THOMAS B. REED (1886)

 

[Wildalaska]

Tell me whats wrong with the bill....

WildcuriousAlaska

 

[Drjones]

What's wrong with the bill?

If someone is stupid enough to leave a gun out where children can get to it (barring of course, children who are already properly trained in firearms safety) why do you think they would be dissuaded by a law?

If someone is dumb enough to leave their kid unattended in the bathtub (per the article's example) why do you think a law would change their behavior?

I think a better question, Mr. Alaska, would be: "Why do you think it is the govts. job to regulate and legislate nearly every aspect of our lives?"

 

[Blackhawk]

If they need another law to prosecute adults for negligent/reckless endangerment of children, they're simply not very imaginative.

THIS law, if passed, will quickly become very abused, and the abuse will be focused on gun owners.

 

[Wildalaska]

ok Im still waitign for the rhetoric to die down and for someone to point out a flaw in a bill that seeks to criminalize a person leaving a dangerous weapon out for a child to injure itself..

Maybe someone can give me a cogent analysis...bill too broad eg, duplicitaive of other legislation..etc?

 

[WonderNine]

prosecutors seeking justice for children

Huh? Seriously? For real???

 

[WonderNine]

ok Im still waitign for the rhetoric to die down and for someone to point out a flaw in a bill that seeks to criminalize a person leaving a dangerous weapon out for a child to injure itself..

Maybe someone can give me a cogent analysis...bill too broad eg, duplicitaive of other legislation..etc?

I remember one time when I was about 4 years old I hit my sister in the head with a stick while we were playing on a sandbar. Perhaps my father should be prosecuted. Or my mother? Or whoever left that stick there.

 

[Drjones]

I remember one time when I was about 4 years old I hit my sister in the head with a stick while we were playing on a sandbar. Perhaps my father should be prosecuted. Or my mother? Or whoever left that stick there.

I'll vote for "whoever left that stick there."

Anyone with even a gram of common sense knows that all sticks are potentially dangerous, and should be locked up.

Playing on a sandbar? With all that dangerous sand you could've just dangerously thrown right into your sister's eyes???

Oh the HUMANITY!!!!

 

[jmbg29]

Maybe someone can give me a cogent analysis...bill too broad eg, duplicitaive of other legislation..etc?

I know of no state in the U.S. that doesn't have a law about criminal negligence.

Do they need a law to tell people not to leave the window open on the fifth floor so the toddler doesn't fall out? How about the 6th floor? The 4th? What about the 7th floor?

Do they need a law that says you shouldn't leave your kid in the car with the windows rolled up in the summer? What about windows rolled down in the winter?

Do they need a law that says you shouldn't leave 4 year olds in the car with the engine running in a locked garage? What if there is a case where the garage was unlocked, but the car wasn't?!? Would they need to amend the ing law?

If they passed any of the above laws, would it help any child that was being looked after by a negligent parent or guardian???????????

Like you didn't already know the answer.

 

[johnr]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/840817/posts
ANTI-GUN ALERT FOR GA HB197 committe results

 

[cuchulainn]

Maybe someone can give me a cogent analysis...bill too broad eg, duplicitaive of other legislation..etc?

jmbg is correct. It is redundant. Does it make sense to pass a law to criminalize already criminalized negligence?

I'll add: by having different negligence laws for different products, you start sending the message that some negligent deaths are less bad than other negligent deaths. Killed your kid by leaving the pills out? Tsk-tsk. At least you didn't leave a gun out, so your fine and jail is less.

 

[Drjones]

jmbg said it all.

Another potential flaw I see with such types of law is: What is "properly secured"?

Assuming they are going to say something like "guns must be properly secured from children" well, what is "properly secured"?

What if they say that if you own guns and have children, ALL firearms must be stored unloaded (magazines empty) locked (with a state approved device only, of course) and in a safe?

What if the "approved locks" they require you to own and use suddenly increase in price to several hundred dollars each? (Due to an unforseen shortage of materials, of course)

What if they say you must store firearms entirely disassembled? (Field-stripped)

What if they say you must store your firearms at the police station?

That is the slope you embark upon with such legislation, much like with mandated training.

EDIT TO ADD:

That is also how they could very easily (and legally) price guns out of the hands of many.

WildwhatisyourrebuttalAlaska, where are you?

 

[FPrice]

johnr...

"http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/840817/posts
ANTI-GUN ALERT FOR GA HB197 committe results"

Thank you for posting this link. While it falls a little short of a complete run-down on the bill, it at least brings those of us from outside Georgia a little closer to understanding exactly what is going on.

From what I read I would have to oppose the bill also. The proponents' continued emphasis on gun-related issues makes it ckear to me that this is an anti-gun bill, not a child protection bill.

 

[SpeedRacer2002]

If someone is stupid enough to leave a gun out where children can get to it (barring of course, children who are already properly trained in firearms safety) why do you think they would be dissuaded by a law?

Leaving aside the merits of this bill, I find the members tend to use arguments such as this when talking about why such legislation is useless.

However arguing this line of defense is based on very faulty logic. The purpose of laws and legislation is not to prevent abuses from taking place, they are to punish those that carry out those acts.

Based on the logic stated above, there would be no reason to have a law against rape or child molestation since they would be unlikely to PREVENT such crimes. The real reason for these laws is to punish the Bastards who break them.

Now if you want to argue that a law exceeds what is necessary to allow us to punish those responsible.

Perhaps a better line of reasoning would be to state that the above law exceeds it's reach in the same way as passing a law to prevent rapes, by requiring men to wear locks on their genetaila at all times unless they had permission from the local legislation to engage in an act of intimatacy.

The fight ahead of us is a tricky one, make sure that the point you are making accurately argues the correct issue at hand.

SpeedRacer