LEAA: Gov. Davis Seals His Fate by Signing Massive CA Handgun Ban

[shooterx10]

LEAA: Gov. Davis Seals His Fate by Signing Massive CA Handgun Ban; Phony 'Safety' Measure Bans Nearly All Models of Handguns Used in Law Enforcement, Self-Defense

9/25/03 5:47:00 PM

To: National Desk

Contact: Kevin Watson of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, 703-847-2677

WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 /U.S. Newswire/ -- In a move signaling the sheer desperation of the final days of his administration, California Gov. Gray Davis yesterday signed into law one of the nation's most expansive handgun bans, outlawing new sales of nearly all handguns in common use for law enforcement and self defense.

The bill masqueraded as a so-called safety measure, by requiring all handguns sold in California to be equipped with magazine disconnects and chamber indicators. Organizations seeking to promote gun control and ban handguns deem these 'safety' devices, while firearm safety experts contend otherwise. The law enforcement community expressly rejects the "magazine disconnect" feature, as it seeks to disable the firearm during a magazine change, a potentially life-threatening result for an officer in a shoot-out.

Gov. Davis' bill also exposes California law enforcement and taxpayers to additional liability risk. The law officially defines guns lacking these features as "unsafe guns." As a result, nearly every single handgun used by California law enforcement officers will be officially defined as an "unsafe handgun," a notion certain to be exploited in lawsuits involving police use of firearms.

Noted firearms safety expert, and developer of the acclaimed "Safety On" multimedia firearms safety program, Michael Marks criticized those billing the gun ban as a safety measure; "This law does not provide one cent for safety education and training, and its requirements for mechanical devices whose value are greatly disputed, actually runs contradictory to the generally accepted principles of firearms safety." Marks added, "Even the antigun, Americans for Gun Safety Foundation, in its Universal Firearms Safety Rules, state that people should, 'never rely on a mechanical safety."

LEAA urges Gov. Davis' soon to be decided replacement to reconsider this ill-advised and misleadingly promoted law.

------

With over 75,000 members and supporters nation-wide, the Law Enforcement Alliance of America (LEAA) is the nation's largest coalition of law enforcement professionals, crime victims, and concerned citizens dedicated to making America safer. Visit our Web site at http://www.LEAA.org

http://www.usnewswire.com/

 

[Kharn]

As a result, nearly every single handgun used by California law enforcement officers will be officially defined as an "unsafe handgun," a notion certain to be exploited in lawsuits involving police use of firearms.

Do I sense some Jim March influence, or is it just a coincidence?

Kharn

 

[Yanus]

Good..........
Now the state can confiscate all of those "eeeeeeeeeevilllll" (and unsafe) handguns from the LE agencies and issue "super soakers" instead.....

{sarcasm off, I think) :banghead:

Yanus

 

[benewton]

"super soakers" would constitute cruel and unusual punishment!

Squirt guns, with a capacity of less than 10 squirts, would be the only "safe" alternative.

And, don't forget the "ammo".

Only distilled, sterile water would be allowed.

 

[sw442642]

I thought LEO guns are explicitly exempt in this law. If I'm right then the LEAA is making fools out of themselves.

The law suit issue is not a real one of major importance. Also, you can find experts to testify that the mag disconnect has saved officers lives.

LEOs can have all kinds of things forbidden to the "civilian". I can't buy a Glock 18 or any new fully auto firearm. Don't here law suits over that.

If I heard wrong about the law, sorry.

 

[MJRW]

It doesn't say LEOs won't have the "unsafe" guns. It just says that if someone gets shot by that gun, they have it on good legal authority that they were shot with an "unsafe" gun.

 

[goalie]

If they are "unsafe" then why are law enforcement officers still allowed to have them? Logic has left the building.

 

[Yanus]

Here is the scenerio....

1. LEO shoots perp with "unsafe" handgun.
2. Perp sues dept and LEO for damages for being shot with "unsafe" gun.
3. After paying millions to perp in damages, dept replaces all "unsafe" guns with brand new PC/"safe" guns to avoid future suits.
4. LEO's begin to be killed and maimed by criminals who are still using "unsafe" guns.

Get the picture?

Yanus

 

[feedthehogs]

Sealed what fate?
The meadow hopping, daisy sniffing residents of California will reward him with a statue or something.

If he loses the recall, it won't be due to anti-gun measures.
If the pro gun voting sector were that strong, they wouldn't be in the shape they're in today.

 

[Jim March]

To be fair, while I may have pushed this argument pretty hard, Chuck Michel invented it after the last "junk"-gun-ban go-around.