That's my little girl's first shot with a pistol.
Posted on 01/29/2010 7:41:02 AM PST by neverdem
By Gintauas Dumicus/State House News Service GateHouse News Service
BOSTON — No individual under the age of 18 would be allowed to handle a fully automatic firearm, even with a parent’s permission, under legislation overhauling the state’s gun laws that lawmakers considered Wednesday.
The bill, filed by Rep. George Peterson (R-Grafton), includes a provision allowing individuals over the age of 18 to temporarily hold or fire a machine gun at a gun show. But they must do so in the presence of an individual licensed to handle machine guns, according to Peterson.
Peterson said he included the provision in a broader firearms bill, in part, to address concerns aired after a 2008 incident at a Westfield gun club, where an 8-year-old boy was killed while he was handling a machine gun.
The current law is “ambiguous” on the handling of automatic firearms, Peterson said after testifying before Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security. “Clearly, the boy was not old enough, physically able to control the firearm,” he said. “Unfortunately, we can’t regulate common sense, or bad decisions by parents. This is one way that will address the age limit.”
An attempt to simplify the state’s gun laws, the bill (H 2259) includes a raft of other provisions, reducing four firearm licenses to one and establishing 13 categories that prevent people from owning a gun. The bill, which lists nine Democratic backers and seven Republicans, drew support from both chairs of Public Safety Committee.
The categories include a person indicted of a crime punishable by up to a year in jail, a person convicted of a violent crime or tagged with a restraining order, a fugitive from justice, an undocumented immigrant, or a person who has renounced his or her U.S. citizenship.
The bill also centralizes gun licensing authority in the Executive Office of Public Safety, with local police chiefs acting as “licensing agents.”
“We have close to 351 different licensing standards across the state,” Peterson said, referring to local police chiefs who currently have the ability to issue gun licenses. “This clears up that ambiguity and makes the licensing procedure clear-cut.”
Sen. James Timilty (D-Walpole), the Senate chair of the Public Safety Committee, called it a “great bill” and said he hoped to see “passage in some form this year.”
“There should be one standard for applying for what is a constitutional right,” Timilty said.
Rep. Michael Costello, the House chair and former assistant district attorney, pledged to work with Peterson on the bill but said he had concerns about taking authority away from local police chiefs, since “nobody is closer on the ground.”
Costello (D-Newburyport) added: “I like the idea of focusing on a prohibited class.”
Lauren Hyer, executive director of Stop Handgun Violence, said she is still reviewing the bill, but took issue with one component: She said the licensing authority should stay with police chiefs.
“It should be in the hands of the communities,” she said. “They know the people in the communities.”
She added that Massachusetts has among the lowest firearm fatality rates in the nation. “Our [present] gun laws have worked out,” she said.
Jim Wallace, executive director of the Gun Owners’ Action League, said the bill is the “top priority, period” for his group.
“This is a starting point. The system we have now is not working,” and is focusing on lawful gun owners instead of illegal gun owners, he said. “The laws have to be clear about who is a criminal and how they should be prosecuted.”
Wallace pointed to one provision in the bill establishing a special unit within the State Police focusing on criminal firearms and trafficking. “We’ll have one entity in the state that is investigating those cases,” he said.
Go back and read my first post.
I was unequivocable in my rejection of such laws.
We already have enough SOLID laws “child endangerment”, “negligence”, etc. to support putting these a$$holes in jail.
Had a child died because a parent or guardian gave them a chainsaw or a combine, it would be no different.
Sorry, I was responding to the language in your post to me.
We already have enough SOLID laws “child endangerment”, “negligence”, etc. to support putting these a$$holes in jail.
Correct. Punish the criminal, not the implement.
My post to you about an AWESOME picture reflected a portion of the greater truth.
Somebody put a child in charge of a dangerous instrument and death resulted. The instrument should matter only in the determination of danger.
It reveals that truth too: She's not wearing safety glasses, hearing protection, or proper clothing that won't get caught in moving material in the breeze (such as the belt feed(. She's not been taught proper position and doesn't appear to be aiming at anything.
Nevertheless, it is a great picture.
That's my little girl's first shot with a pistol.
My son shoots my Uzi subgun quite well. He’s 14 now, but has been shooting since he was 6.
Wow, a blast from the past... I think I still have that t-shirt around somewhere.
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.