Harry Tuttle
Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2003
- Messages
- 3,093
http://news.mywebpal.com/news_tool_...ID=527041&CategoryID=4628&show=localnews&om=2
Readers sound off on gun ban legislation
02/18/04
Story
Email this story to a friend
NOTE: The editorial in last week's edition of the Times erred in
stating that the proposed assault weapon ban before the General
Assembly would address guns that fire multiple rounds with the single
squeeze of a trigger.
The Times regrets that error.
The bill actually addresses semiautomatic firearms, which fire one
round at a time, are fed by a magazine and have features such as a
pistol grip, collapsible stock and flash suppressor.
While the federal government bans the importation of semiautomatic
firearms, the ban on those of domestic manufacture is due to expire
in 2004. The Maryland bill would extend that ban to all so-called
assault firearms.
For a complete copy of the Senate version of the bill, go to the
Maryland General Assembly Web site, www.mlis.state.md.us/, and enter
SB288 under the "Bill Information and Status" section.
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Multiple-fire guns illegal without a federal permit
You are misinforming the public about the gun ban. To own a firearm
that fires all shots "with a single pull of the trigger" (a machine
gun) is already illegal without a Federal Class 3 permit.
Donald Hoffman
Sykesville
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Bill has the potential to turn citizens into criminals
Whoever wrote last week's editorial got the facts wrong! The article
says the proposed legislation bans weapons capable of firing multiple
bullets with the single pull of the trigger. This is not true!
The proposed bill says semiautomatic weapons; that means that the
weapon will fire one bullet each time the trigger is pulled. Not
many, nor hundreds. That definition applies to a lot of weapons; a
lot that are used for hunting, competitive shooting, target practice,
etc.
The editorial also does not mention that the state can ban any weapon
simply based on a single cosmetic feature - such as a pistol grip on
a shotgun - of which there are many in existence today used for
hunting, or a thumbhole-style stock.
More important is the fact that this legislation will affect the law-
abiding citizens and not the criminal element, which doesn't follow
the rules anyway.
This law has real potential for turning once-law-abiding citizens
into criminals, because it calls for mandatory registration
of "assault weapons" now in the hands of citizens. What happens when
the unknowing citizen who knows nothing of the new law gets caught
with an illegal weapon in his procession? He's now a criminal and
he's going to jail for somewhere between three and 20 years.
The people of this state deserve to know the truth about the
provisions of this legislation - before they become the victims of it!
Dwight D. Fletcher
Boonsboro, Md.
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
If federal ban has been so effective, why is it ending?
Last week's editorial in the Towson Times states: "The General
Assembly is considering a measure that would extend the federal
government's ban on several assault weapons, including AK-47s, Uzis
and Streetsweepers _ all gun types that spray a great number of
bullets with the single squeeze of a trigger."
If this is what you are being told, then they are lying to you. They
want to ban "semiautomatic" firearms, not automatic firearms. In
fact, automatic firearms have been legal to buy since 1934, and are
still legal to buy despite the federal act of 1984, which is due to
expire in September.
If you can afford the cost and the federal stamp, you can buy one
this weekend in Baltimore County. Nothing in Maryland SB 288 would
change that.
The bill would allow the state to ban any firearm that looks like an
assault weapon or what they think an assault weapons should look
like. By the way, the M-1 Garand - the firearm or "assault weapon" of
the U.S. Army and our 29th Division in World War II - is not on this
list but, like the others, only fires one bullet with each pull of
the trigger.
Others like the Bushmaster also only fire one single shot with each
pull of the trigger. Where is the danger here?
You state, "The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms says
use of these assault weapons by criminals has fallen two-thirds since
the band was enacted." Really? If in 10 years they used five of this
type of firearm, then a drop of three would be enough?
If this is the case, then why is the federal ban ending after 10
years in September?
Jim Fretwell
Towson
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Senate's gun ban proposal would not reduce crime
Banning so-called "assault rifles" will fail to reduce crime because
criminals rarely use them. Criminals desire firearms that are light
and easily concealed. Assault rifles are neither light nor easily
concealed. In general, these firearms are over 3 feet long and weigh
in excess of 7 pounds without a magazine in place.
Contrary to the Times editorial, the source of the claim that the use
of assault rifles fell by two thirds since the federal ban was
enacted is not the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, but the
notoriously anti-gun U.S. Senator, Diane Feinstein. The senator's
office has yet to provide documentation to substantiate that claim.
Even if the claim were true, such firearms are used in less than 2.5
percent of gun related crimes. A two thirds reduction would lower
that figure to .8 percent which is hardly a significant reduction.
During testimony in Annapolis last week, the ban's proponents were
unable to substantiate any of their claims with factual
documentation. This fact was not lost on the committee members.
This association sent a Public Information Act request for
information to every law enforcement agency. The nine-year period
1994-2003 revealed only 14 documented cases of assault rifles being
used in crimes, two cases of officers being assaulted with such
firearms and no officer deaths involving assault firearms. The
Baltimore County Police Department took no position on the bill and
the Maryland State Police opposed the bill as unnecessary.
It should be noted that the Homicide Section of the Uniform Crime
Reports published by the Maryland State Police does not even list
assault weapons as a distinct category of weapon due to their
extremely low instance of use.
Data provided by the Maryland Uniform Crime Reports 1975-2002
demonstrates that long guns of all types are used less often than
blunt object, knives, personal weapons and all other weapons.
This bill will not reduce crime, it will not save lives. The only
thing this bill will do is ban a large number of semiautomatic rifles
(including hunting rifles), ban virtually all semi-automatic pistols
and establish mandatory registration that will provide the state with
a list of law abiding citizens who own these firearms for sport and
self defense. Those who fail to register their firearms within the
two-month period allowed will become criminals. Criminals cannot be
compelled to register firearms.
Those who support gun control are also fond of characterizing their
bills as "reasonable" or simply "closing loopholes." This small step
will "only" ban new firearms and register the existing firearms and
their owners as well as banning virtually all semi-automatic pistols.
The next bill will no doubt be an equally reasonable bill to close
the "ownership and possession loophole" by banning and confiscating
the remaining firearms - something that cannot be accomplished
without registration.
The ban's lead sponsor attempted to justify this bill by contending
that "nobody needs these rifles for hunting or target shooting." It
is a sad commentary on our state when some of our legislators have
decided that they have the right to ban anything based upon their own
personal perception of need.
The Constitution of the United States contains a Bill of Rights, not
a bill of needs. The Constitution of Maryland contains a Declaration
of Rights, not a declaration of needs. I for one do not wish to see
my children live in a world where free citizens must constantly prove
to the government that they have a "need" to own something in order
to keep it from being banned.
Freedom is rarely lost in a single event. It is eroded step by step,
right by right. Gun bans put the weak at the mercy of the strong, the
few at the mercy of the many.
If you or your child were about to be abducted and murdered, who
would you rather see arrive on the scene: the CeaseFire Maryland
folks waving their bill to ban guns or me with my assault rifle?
John H. Josselyn, legislative vice president
Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Bill impacts semiautomatic weapons with accessories
I am writing in reference to last week's editorial, "Ban on assault
weapons is a law worth keeping."
I refer to this paragraph referencing "all gun types that spray a
greater number of bullets with the single squeeze of a trigger."
This is a lie: The bill refers to semiautomatic firearms only.
Fully automatic firearms, which are defined in federal law as
firearms that fire more than one bullet with a single pull of the
trigger, are already regulated (including a ban on manufacture) at
the federal level.
Instead, those bills deal with semi-automatic firearms, which
cosmetically resemble fully automatic firearms. There is nothing more
dangerous about an "assault weapon" than any other kind of rifle.
Matthew Hunter
Austin, Texas
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Assault weapons are the place to draw the line
Thank you for the editorial, "Ban on assault weapons is a law worth
keeping" (Feb. 11). A recent survey by Gonzales Research reveals that
77 percent of Marylanders agree that assault weapons and copycat
versions should not be available in Maryland. Only 19 percent oppose
a ban on these weapons.
I wanted to correct one thing, though. CeaseFire Maryland is a
grassroots, non-profit organization whose mission is to free Maryland
from gun violence, not to ban all guns. We, like you, believe a line
in the sand needs to be drawn with respect to the lethality of
weapons available to the average citizen.
We draw that line at assault weapons, which are designed to kill
large numbers of human beings as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Leah Barrett, executive director, CeaseFire Maryland
Annapolis
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Roadblocks for assault weapons are appropriate
Regarding the proposed ban on assault weapons, the most important
question to ask is, "Why shouldn't assault weapons be banned?"
The only people who need them are criminals, terrorists and paranoid
militias. Should we make it easier for them to buy them? Or continue
to put up as many roadblocks as possible?
It is bizarre that our country is fighting terrorism and wanting to
sell assault weapons to anyone who walks into a gun store.
Jeanne Marklin
Silver Spring
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Those backing ban would leave citizens defenseless
I cannot believe, with the United States at war, that 20 state
senators and the president of the Senate would sponsor legislation to
take away the semiautomatic rifles and shotguns we use to train a new
generation of American riflemen.
In doing so, they give aid and comfort to the enemy: al Qaeda, the
Taliban and Islamic extremists trying to destroy our way of life.
Sens. Garagiola, Hollinger and Kasemeyer are not strong defenders of
the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but big government liberals out
to regulate every last aspect of out life.
They lack wisdom and are kidding themselves if they think the firearm
owners of Maryland pay any attention to them or their left-wing
agenda to disarm the law abiding and leave them at the mercy of
enemies and criminals.
Jim Norris
Calverton
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Congress is not likely to extend ban, so state should
As president and founder of CeaseFire Maryland Inc., formerly
Marylanders Against Handgun Abuse, I would like to state that since
we began as a statewide grassroots organization in the mid-1980s, we
have always been for reducing lethal gun violence, but we have never
advocated a total ban on all guns.
We cannot understand why anyone could possibly want to legalize the
sale of the dangerous semiautomatic assault weapons banned by the
federal law passed by Congress 10 years ago.
Unfortunately, the current leadership in Congress is controlled by
the gun lobby, and is therefore not likely to extend the federal ban
past its expiration date this September.
That is why we believe it imperative to pass a Maryland law banning
assault weapons, and close the loopholes in the federal law by
banning copycats, such as the Bushmaster XM-15, which was used by the
snipers that terrorized Maryland in 2002.
Matt Fenton, president, CeaseFire Maryland
Lutherville
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Additional law restricting gun ownership is too much
The definition of "gun" changes with each generation and eventually,
they will try to make all weapons illegal.
Already, cap pistols are illegal in some areas. I am opposed to any
further laws restricting the ownership or the sale of them.
William D. Townsend
Timonium
Readers sound off on gun ban legislation
02/18/04
Story
Email this story to a friend
NOTE: The editorial in last week's edition of the Times erred in
stating that the proposed assault weapon ban before the General
Assembly would address guns that fire multiple rounds with the single
squeeze of a trigger.
The Times regrets that error.
The bill actually addresses semiautomatic firearms, which fire one
round at a time, are fed by a magazine and have features such as a
pistol grip, collapsible stock and flash suppressor.
While the federal government bans the importation of semiautomatic
firearms, the ban on those of domestic manufacture is due to expire
in 2004. The Maryland bill would extend that ban to all so-called
assault firearms.
For a complete copy of the Senate version of the bill, go to the
Maryland General Assembly Web site, www.mlis.state.md.us/, and enter
SB288 under the "Bill Information and Status" section.
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Multiple-fire guns illegal without a federal permit
You are misinforming the public about the gun ban. To own a firearm
that fires all shots "with a single pull of the trigger" (a machine
gun) is already illegal without a Federal Class 3 permit.
Donald Hoffman
Sykesville
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Bill has the potential to turn citizens into criminals
Whoever wrote last week's editorial got the facts wrong! The article
says the proposed legislation bans weapons capable of firing multiple
bullets with the single pull of the trigger. This is not true!
The proposed bill says semiautomatic weapons; that means that the
weapon will fire one bullet each time the trigger is pulled. Not
many, nor hundreds. That definition applies to a lot of weapons; a
lot that are used for hunting, competitive shooting, target practice,
etc.
The editorial also does not mention that the state can ban any weapon
simply based on a single cosmetic feature - such as a pistol grip on
a shotgun - of which there are many in existence today used for
hunting, or a thumbhole-style stock.
More important is the fact that this legislation will affect the law-
abiding citizens and not the criminal element, which doesn't follow
the rules anyway.
This law has real potential for turning once-law-abiding citizens
into criminals, because it calls for mandatory registration
of "assault weapons" now in the hands of citizens. What happens when
the unknowing citizen who knows nothing of the new law gets caught
with an illegal weapon in his procession? He's now a criminal and
he's going to jail for somewhere between three and 20 years.
The people of this state deserve to know the truth about the
provisions of this legislation - before they become the victims of it!
Dwight D. Fletcher
Boonsboro, Md.
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
If federal ban has been so effective, why is it ending?
Last week's editorial in the Towson Times states: "The General
Assembly is considering a measure that would extend the federal
government's ban on several assault weapons, including AK-47s, Uzis
and Streetsweepers _ all gun types that spray a great number of
bullets with the single squeeze of a trigger."
If this is what you are being told, then they are lying to you. They
want to ban "semiautomatic" firearms, not automatic firearms. In
fact, automatic firearms have been legal to buy since 1934, and are
still legal to buy despite the federal act of 1984, which is due to
expire in September.
If you can afford the cost and the federal stamp, you can buy one
this weekend in Baltimore County. Nothing in Maryland SB 288 would
change that.
The bill would allow the state to ban any firearm that looks like an
assault weapon or what they think an assault weapons should look
like. By the way, the M-1 Garand - the firearm or "assault weapon" of
the U.S. Army and our 29th Division in World War II - is not on this
list but, like the others, only fires one bullet with each pull of
the trigger.
Others like the Bushmaster also only fire one single shot with each
pull of the trigger. Where is the danger here?
You state, "The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms says
use of these assault weapons by criminals has fallen two-thirds since
the band was enacted." Really? If in 10 years they used five of this
type of firearm, then a drop of three would be enough?
If this is the case, then why is the federal ban ending after 10
years in September?
Jim Fretwell
Towson
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Senate's gun ban proposal would not reduce crime
Banning so-called "assault rifles" will fail to reduce crime because
criminals rarely use them. Criminals desire firearms that are light
and easily concealed. Assault rifles are neither light nor easily
concealed. In general, these firearms are over 3 feet long and weigh
in excess of 7 pounds without a magazine in place.
Contrary to the Times editorial, the source of the claim that the use
of assault rifles fell by two thirds since the federal ban was
enacted is not the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, but the
notoriously anti-gun U.S. Senator, Diane Feinstein. The senator's
office has yet to provide documentation to substantiate that claim.
Even if the claim were true, such firearms are used in less than 2.5
percent of gun related crimes. A two thirds reduction would lower
that figure to .8 percent which is hardly a significant reduction.
During testimony in Annapolis last week, the ban's proponents were
unable to substantiate any of their claims with factual
documentation. This fact was not lost on the committee members.
This association sent a Public Information Act request for
information to every law enforcement agency. The nine-year period
1994-2003 revealed only 14 documented cases of assault rifles being
used in crimes, two cases of officers being assaulted with such
firearms and no officer deaths involving assault firearms. The
Baltimore County Police Department took no position on the bill and
the Maryland State Police opposed the bill as unnecessary.
It should be noted that the Homicide Section of the Uniform Crime
Reports published by the Maryland State Police does not even list
assault weapons as a distinct category of weapon due to their
extremely low instance of use.
Data provided by the Maryland Uniform Crime Reports 1975-2002
demonstrates that long guns of all types are used less often than
blunt object, knives, personal weapons and all other weapons.
This bill will not reduce crime, it will not save lives. The only
thing this bill will do is ban a large number of semiautomatic rifles
(including hunting rifles), ban virtually all semi-automatic pistols
and establish mandatory registration that will provide the state with
a list of law abiding citizens who own these firearms for sport and
self defense. Those who fail to register their firearms within the
two-month period allowed will become criminals. Criminals cannot be
compelled to register firearms.
Those who support gun control are also fond of characterizing their
bills as "reasonable" or simply "closing loopholes." This small step
will "only" ban new firearms and register the existing firearms and
their owners as well as banning virtually all semi-automatic pistols.
The next bill will no doubt be an equally reasonable bill to close
the "ownership and possession loophole" by banning and confiscating
the remaining firearms - something that cannot be accomplished
without registration.
The ban's lead sponsor attempted to justify this bill by contending
that "nobody needs these rifles for hunting or target shooting." It
is a sad commentary on our state when some of our legislators have
decided that they have the right to ban anything based upon their own
personal perception of need.
The Constitution of the United States contains a Bill of Rights, not
a bill of needs. The Constitution of Maryland contains a Declaration
of Rights, not a declaration of needs. I for one do not wish to see
my children live in a world where free citizens must constantly prove
to the government that they have a "need" to own something in order
to keep it from being banned.
Freedom is rarely lost in a single event. It is eroded step by step,
right by right. Gun bans put the weak at the mercy of the strong, the
few at the mercy of the many.
If you or your child were about to be abducted and murdered, who
would you rather see arrive on the scene: the CeaseFire Maryland
folks waving their bill to ban guns or me with my assault rifle?
John H. Josselyn, legislative vice president
Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Bill impacts semiautomatic weapons with accessories
I am writing in reference to last week's editorial, "Ban on assault
weapons is a law worth keeping."
I refer to this paragraph referencing "all gun types that spray a
greater number of bullets with the single squeeze of a trigger."
This is a lie: The bill refers to semiautomatic firearms only.
Fully automatic firearms, which are defined in federal law as
firearms that fire more than one bullet with a single pull of the
trigger, are already regulated (including a ban on manufacture) at
the federal level.
Instead, those bills deal with semi-automatic firearms, which
cosmetically resemble fully automatic firearms. There is nothing more
dangerous about an "assault weapon" than any other kind of rifle.
Matthew Hunter
Austin, Texas
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Assault weapons are the place to draw the line
Thank you for the editorial, "Ban on assault weapons is a law worth
keeping" (Feb. 11). A recent survey by Gonzales Research reveals that
77 percent of Marylanders agree that assault weapons and copycat
versions should not be available in Maryland. Only 19 percent oppose
a ban on these weapons.
I wanted to correct one thing, though. CeaseFire Maryland is a
grassroots, non-profit organization whose mission is to free Maryland
from gun violence, not to ban all guns. We, like you, believe a line
in the sand needs to be drawn with respect to the lethality of
weapons available to the average citizen.
We draw that line at assault weapons, which are designed to kill
large numbers of human beings as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Leah Barrett, executive director, CeaseFire Maryland
Annapolis
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Roadblocks for assault weapons are appropriate
Regarding the proposed ban on assault weapons, the most important
question to ask is, "Why shouldn't assault weapons be banned?"
The only people who need them are criminals, terrorists and paranoid
militias. Should we make it easier for them to buy them? Or continue
to put up as many roadblocks as possible?
It is bizarre that our country is fighting terrorism and wanting to
sell assault weapons to anyone who walks into a gun store.
Jeanne Marklin
Silver Spring
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Those backing ban would leave citizens defenseless
I cannot believe, with the United States at war, that 20 state
senators and the president of the Senate would sponsor legislation to
take away the semiautomatic rifles and shotguns we use to train a new
generation of American riflemen.
In doing so, they give aid and comfort to the enemy: al Qaeda, the
Taliban and Islamic extremists trying to destroy our way of life.
Sens. Garagiola, Hollinger and Kasemeyer are not strong defenders of
the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but big government liberals out
to regulate every last aspect of out life.
They lack wisdom and are kidding themselves if they think the firearm
owners of Maryland pay any attention to them or their left-wing
agenda to disarm the law abiding and leave them at the mercy of
enemies and criminals.
Jim Norris
Calverton
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Congress is not likely to extend ban, so state should
As president and founder of CeaseFire Maryland Inc., formerly
Marylanders Against Handgun Abuse, I would like to state that since
we began as a statewide grassroots organization in the mid-1980s, we
have always been for reducing lethal gun violence, but we have never
advocated a total ban on all guns.
We cannot understand why anyone could possibly want to legalize the
sale of the dangerous semiautomatic assault weapons banned by the
federal law passed by Congress 10 years ago.
Unfortunately, the current leadership in Congress is controlled by
the gun lobby, and is therefore not likely to extend the federal ban
past its expiration date this September.
That is why we believe it imperative to pass a Maryland law banning
assault weapons, and close the loopholes in the federal law by
banning copycats, such as the Bushmaster XM-15, which was used by the
snipers that terrorized Maryland in 2002.
Matt Fenton, president, CeaseFire Maryland
Lutherville
>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Additional law restricting gun ownership is too much
The definition of "gun" changes with each generation and eventually,
they will try to make all weapons illegal.
Already, cap pistols are illegal in some areas. I am opposed to any
further laws restricting the ownership or the sale of them.
William D. Townsend
Timonium
:banghead: