Posted on 02/26/2004 2:30:06 PM PST by yonif
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Senate agreement requiring child safety locks on U.S. handguns gave Democrats encouragement Thursday that renewing an assault weapons ban might also become part of a package to protect gun makers and sellers from gun crime lawsuits.
The GOP-controlled Senate voted 70-27 to require all handguns sold in the United States to have child safety locks, adding the measure to the legislation providing the gun industry immunity from suits when a legally sold gun is subsequently used in a crime.
Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer of California and Herb Kohl of Wisconsin argued that requiring child safety locks on newly purchased handguns would help reduce the number of children accidentally killed by handguns in the home. Every 48 hours, a child is killed through an accidental shooting, Boxer said.
"If we were to pass this legislation and it became the law of the land, the number of children involved in the number of accidental shootings would go way down," she said.
Kohl said the bill "is not a panacea. It will not prevent every single avoidable firearm-related accident. But the fact is that all parents want to protect their children. This legislation will ensure that people purchase child-safety locks when they buy guns. Those who buy locks are more likely to use them. That much we know is certain."
The Senate in 1999 passed similar legislation but the House refused to approve the measure.
Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, the sponsor of the gunmaker immunity legislation, argued against the measure, saying gun manufacturers already are working on the problem. Craig said the amendment would be an intrusion of the federal government into people's private homes.
"For the first time, the long arm of government will reach into the private place and suggest to the average American how they will store an object in that private place," he said. "I'm not arguing about the care and the emotion and the concern and the reality. Not that at all. I understand that. But I don't believe that government ought to be telling the average citizen how they store objects within their home."
Craig and other Republicans, including the Bush administration, also called on senators not to add amendments to the gunmaker immunity bill that could bog it down.
Gun advocates say firearm manufacturers make legal products and should not have to spend millions of dollars fighting off suits. A test vote earlier this week garnered 75 votes for the measure, with Democrats agreeing to vote for the measure after the GOP agreed that firearms makers and distributors would not be immune to suits involving defective products or illegal sales.
The GOP-controlled House already has passed the bill. However, Senate changes will require that House and Senate negotiators agree to a compromise version, which could take months given the strong feelings on both sides.
For example, leaders in the GOP-controlled House already have said they do not plan to approve an extension of the expiring assault weapons ban. But Senate Democrats say they are close to getting enough votes to add that measure to the gunmaker bill.
"Any amendment that would delay enactment of the bill beyond this year is unacceptable," the White House said Tuesday.
The Senate's overwhelming approval of the gun lock amendment shows that senators are not listening to that advice and could be convinced that the assault weapons ban and other Democratic legislation should be added to the package, Boxer said. "Senators are not buying the argument that the bill should be clean."
Democrats are very close to having enough support to reauthorize the assault weapons ban for 10 more years, she said. The ban expires in September.
"We believe we can get to 51," said Boxer, referring to the number of votes needed to add the measure to the gunmaker immunity bill.
------
On the Net:
Information on the bill, S. 1805, can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov
The devil made us do it lol
I can see that those who go out and purposefully buy a lock are are more likely to use it (I'm assuming the statement doesn't mean more likely than those who don't buy locks and is just poorly worded and not asinine). What I'm curious about is the basis of the implied conclusion that locks automatically included in the purchase of a handgun without the owners intent are more likely to be used (than one acquired in another manner I presume). Anyone know of any studies I can reference about this?
Notice they locks "*on* the guns" not with *with* the gun. That means most guns sold today would no longer be able to be sold, if that is what the amendment says. <> Notice too that Senator Craig talks about storage. Does that mean there is a storage provision in the bill? Since NoOne seems to have the text of the amendment, including I'll bet, most of the Senator who voted for it, we just don't know. And by the time we do know the bill may be passed and the only hope will lie in the House conferees and the House itself.
When the gun lock police break your door down at Oh Dark Thirty, be sure to remember your statement. If they want to badly enough, or they just have it in for you, say because you're a known "gun nut", they can make you, if the law so provides or can be interpreted (creativley of course) to so provide.
What would you think it would do that, when it represents just another infringement on those rights, albeit MAYBE a small one. It'll more likely embolden the gun grabbers.
Actually they started out with requiring the manufacturers to provide anchor points for them. I had a '62 Pontiac Tempest (don't laugh, other than the engine, I liked the little beast) that someone had added aftermarket belts. They had the airline type "lever" latches, not the push button type most OE seat belts have always had.
I don't give anybody reason to break down my door.
The Constitution says the matter is not up for a vote. But then hardly anybody pays any attention to the old rag these days.
I wonder how many people will be wounded or killed simply because they tried either to install or remove a trigger lock on a gun that's cocked and loaded.
If the PDF's were created from a text based application, such as a word processing program, like Word, you can use the the text select tool to copy the text, which you can then past into a post here on FR. However if you got them as an image, or scaned them in and pasted the image into a PDF document, there is no easy way to recover the text.
Where did you get them? If they exist on the web, even an image, you can just post the URL to where you got them from. If you have access to web accessable storage, many ISPs provide some of this, you can FTP the file to that storage and post the link to that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.