Maryland shell casing law.

Great Debates
1

Previosly posted mis-titled, due to “bug”
Feel free to re-ignore. :wink:

I too, like Oblong, will post this question here. For the same reasons.
I just heard on the news about the new (Nov. 2000) law in Maryland requiring gun manufacturers to test fire weapons sold in that state, and to include the shell casing with the gun.
The idea is that law enforcement would build a database of the markings on the casing to be used to track guns used in crimes.
The point of the news story was that many makers have refused to ship to Maryland, claiming that this law isn’t workable because it isn’t universal to all states.
So why do they care? I don’t see the big deal here, one way or the other. Just another law enforcement tool, IMO.
I would be interested to hear any objections (to this law) gun owners might have.
Please don’t call me names. :slight_smile:
Peace,
mangeorge

2

Fine with me.

Though it’s flawed. Do the sellers remove the casings before selling the gun to Jerk Q. Public, or does he get them, supposedly to send them in to the cops?

They need to fire each gun and send bullets and casings from each gun, serial numbers included, so they’ll have a record of the lands and pin mark. One problem is, that the firing pin will wear under steady usage and change from the original, but the lands and groves won’t.

No one should gripe about it unless they plan on committing a crime with the weapon. Besides, if one is enterprising enough, lands and groves can be altered and so can the firing pin.

3

I should have said, send the bullets and casings to the FBI to build up the data base.

4

Did they exclude revolvers from this requirement?

Bet they didn’t. And no doubt the cost of this pointless exercise will be passed on to the gun purchaser…sigh.

5

I can’t believe the crap posted in this thread already.

Mind telling me why you consider all legal firearms purchasers “jerks”?

If this is really your line of thinking, maybe we should throw you in the “Is AVSC916 a facist?” thread.

If you are not abusing your children, surely you won’t mind the state strip searching them monthly to look for signs of abuse.

If you are not planning a crime, surely you will not mind the state secretly listening in occasionaly to your phone conversations. Since we all know that criminals will try to get around this, the state will also bug your house occasionaly to make sure you are not planning crimes while alone.

If you are not hiding anything, then surely you will not mind the state coming in randomly and and searching your house.

If you are not a drug user, then surely you will not mind submitting your blood and urine samples every once in awhile to the state for testing.

If you are sane, then surely you will not mind random pyschological testing by the state.

Listen dude…

…the government was made to SERVE the individual, not CONTROL them.

You mean like a criminal?

So then what the hell is the point of this worthless law?

Registration.

It couldn’t pass as a registration only law, so they snuck it in the backdoor. It accomplishes absolutley NOTHING except the creation of a registration database. How long will it be before gun owners are reguired to send in annual case samples? How long before they are required to bring the firearms down to the police station annualy to confirm they are in possesion of the firearms? How long before that turns into spot home inspections?
The main reason most firearms dealers are not participating at this time is the added cost and effort. It is my understanding that the manufacturers are not set-up to know what state a particular firearm will be sold in. Personally, I would be happy if the manufacturers decided to halt all sales to a state like Maryland. (Cali, NJ and Mass also)

I mean ALL sales. I think that any city that sues them should be boycotted. Let their police throw rocks at the criminals if guns are so evil.

6

And the initial thread may be found at this link, if you’re interested. http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=54217

7

Thank you Freedom2. That was well said. However, I believe you missed a glaring contradiction in AVSC916’s first post. I quote, “Fine with me. Though it’s flawed.” Apparently, AVSC916 is in favor of flawed legislation that will only generate more useless lawsuits and allow the courts to become yet more activist. Sad.

8

Here’s a link to the NBC story;

A little more detail, but not a lot.

True, but there are individuals on both sides of this issue. The government’s job is to weigh the needs of these individuals.
BTW; Aren’t firearms test fired anyway, before leaving the factory?
Peace,
mangeorge

9

Not when it conflicts with one sides rights.
Re-read the Bill of Rights. When you start stepping over the lines drawn there in order to keep another another group happy, then you have gone to far. The other group just has to live with it.

BTW…

If you could tell me how this will save even one life, or prevent even one crime, I would lose a little bit of bitterness about this law.

10

My God! If the provisions of that law, as reported in your link, are accurate, this is a horrible piece of legislation. It’s also a bad piece of reporting. I’m curious why the writer didn’t contact any gun manufacturer’s to verify whether they’re shipping guns to Maryland, or not. Nor does the writer make a clear distinction in the types of firearms the law applies to.

This law does nothing to promote gun safety. It’s a cleverly disguised registration scheme. As we all know, only brand new guns are used to commit crimes, never older models and never guns that have been brought across state lines. What’s next? Citizens who own guns will have to bring them to the cops for test firings and submission of those cartridges to be entered in the “database?” How 'bout we fingerprint everybody as a precautionary measure? How 'bout we just do a psychological profile on everybody and lock up all those who show a predispostion to criminal behavior. We’ll call it a “safety” measure, too.

I also find it very curious that only “a little more than 100 ballistic fingerprints have been entered in the computer system since Oct. 1.” If this is truly a “gun safety” issue, why the delay? I’m sure more than 100 guns were sold in Maryland in that time frame.

Also, and not totally on topic, but it’s part of the same legislative package,

This is the first step in allowing the state to deny gun posession to legitimate owners. Does this law also apply to rifle purchasers, or is it only handgunners? Again, bad reporting.

This sucks more than the rest of the law. What if the technology doesn’t exist in 2003? Who gets to determine and approve the efficacy of these intergral gun locks? The legislature? Potentially, they could deny that any method is inherently “safe enough” and disallow the sales of all handguns.

Now, does anybody still wanna argue that the “slippery slope” is a fallacy? There’s some damned fine evidence for it in this piece of legislation. Maryland, it appears, is well on the way to a total handgun ban.

11

Bullshit! The legislation discussed in this thread is a far, far cry from banning or confiscating guns. Don’t you think people can tell the difference between filling out a form and having their guns taken away, and might be opposed to the latter even if they supported the former?

As I stated in another thread, a slippery slope requires an inexorable inpetus and a lack of opportunity to halt or reverse the process. I have yet to see any assessment of the political support for a gun ban to indicate it would ever be significant. Legislation does not change all by itself until we get to the point where laws that nobody wants are imposed.

The Maryland shell casing law is designed to make it easier for police to make the connection between ammunition at a crime scene and the gun and its owner, not to be a “step” toward confiscation. If you knew the cops had tecnology which might connect you to a shooting, you’d be deterred from doing so. And if there’s a way to defeat that technology, well that’s one more burden on the criminal. Making crime more difficult reduces it.

Fine. But registration and ballistic sampling doesn’t conflict with anyone’s rights. Read the Bill of Rights. Where will it end? When it gets to the point where it does conflict with your rights.

12

IIRC, it akready does.

13

[hijack]
Sorry RoboDude, the last I heard the ‘smart gun’ electronics didn’t remain workable after a single shot. But that’s just my recollection.

Check this out:
Colt’s Position on Personalized Weapons Technology

quote:
Colt’s Manufacturing is a strong proponent of gun safety through design and training. We believe also that the potential merger of electronics to small firearms is a natural evolution. We are currently working on a prototype for the law enforcement market that will address the issue of guns being taken away from police officers and used against them. We believe this firearm or ‘smart gun’ could be in full-scale production within 2 or 3 years, if all goes well in the testing and production process. If personal ID technology continues to evolve it is conceivable that within 2 or 3 years after that, a consumer model of the ‘smart gun’ could be in production.

[/hijack]

14

lockable guns…

My understanding is that only the Taurus revolver has a lock built into the system. The key is only some sort of allen key, so it addresses children more than it does criminals.(this is a metal low-tech lock) The only electronic stuff I have seen looks clunky and unreliable. Once electronic guns are widespread, I expect the criminals(and police) will have a little electronic device that “turns-off” all the new guns within a couple hundred feet. Somehow this does not appeal to me.

Once they issue that crap to the police and army, I will consider buying it for myself. Until it is considered safe and reliable enough for the police, then it should not be imposed on private citizens.

BTW…

Here in Socialist NJ, (where I live) there is currently a bill up for a vote sometime soon that would impose a similiar hurdle for new handgun buyers in NJ. Once ONE working model is available ANYWHERE in the nation, then only handguns with internal locks could be sold in the state.

Curiously…law enforcement is going to be exempt.

If no new handguns are being shipped to Maryland, then a de facto ban is in place. I can see this, can’t you?

FYI…

Registration is the first step towards confiscation. This database does absolutely nothing except start the process of registration.

I’m a far cry from a criminal, but I will always do everything in my power to decrease the knowledge the state has about me. I bought my first firearms over the counter here in NJ, so they are already registered. Once I learned more, everything since has been bought out of state in a private sale(still legal). If I am ever forced to buy a gun that has had it’s “fingerprints” taken, the very first thing I will do to it will be to modify those markings.

Of course this will probably be made illegal…

…I’m sure that will stop me.

Seems we disagree.

How about you register with the goverment before you post on the web or attend a political rally? Maybe you could register before you go to church?

When you have to ask permission before you can exercise a right, then it is no longer a right.

15

Since I and 99.99% of the SDMB have no idea what other thread you are referring to, mind if I ask a couple questions?

  1. Is the qualifier “inexorable impetus” something of your own, or generally accepted?

IMO, and my definition, it simply is a gradual, persistant erosion of rights with one clear, final goal in mind that is rarely stated honestly to the public. IE, banning fully auto weapons, semi-auto weapons, handguns, registration, fingerprinting, banning all but a few hunting weapons, mandatory storage of guns at “clubs”, enormous fees and taxes, waiting periods of years, mandatory storage with police, then finally complete confiscation - all along the way with the stated goal of “saving the children”, instead of “we think you should be disarmed”.

Note I’m not speculating on this chain of events, just giving an example of a process I would term “slippery slope”.

  1. Very few major laws are ever reveresed once passed. Prohibition stands out as a very rare case, however. So is it fair to say that there is ample opportunity to stop the process? It was pretty clear in 1994 that the Democratically controlled Congress passed a Gun Control law that did not have the support of the majority of the voters who were informed of the true intent of said law. And this was reflected in part by the results of the “Republican Revolution” (and then the Republicans took a big, steaming dump on gun owners like myself…sigh)

I think you left out another aspect of what makes up a legislative slippery slope - a clearly partisan media establishment that overwhelmingly puts it’s resources to producing one-sided and slanted reporting, purposeful and persistant omission of facts preferential to the opposing side, and finally out-and-out lying on page one, with the retraction on page 38E, right next to the “Cathy” comic and the horoscope. (like the Kansas City Star, my hometown paper, is famous for).

Just wondering about where your definition of slippery slope comes from. Because IMO, we are already well down that slope, with no hope of return.

16

Dude!!

My guns are registered. If the cops want bullet samples, I don’t care. Like, I’m not planning on going out and blowing away any antigun control fanatics any time soon. What is it with you gun anal retentives anyhow? If you buy a gun for whatever and don’t plan on killing anyone with it, why the heck should you care if the cops have a sample of the shots fired?

And, yeah, I’ve got no darn problem with pee tests in schools or whatever what with all of the drugs around. In one job, we took random tests or loose the job, dude. We were handling sensitive stuff and we caught two workers screwed up! In another job, I was in charge and I brought in the pee tests when I spotted a couple of dudes obviously screwed up bombing around on our really big fork lifts. Pee tests every month, man, with some dudes getting ‘randomly’ picked frequently.

I don’t want to be working under a couple of tons of metal when the dude running it is under the influence of even weed. If his reaction time is slow, it’s real bad for me, so he pees in a cup and I stay in one piece, along with my workers.

Don’t want to pee in a cup? Cool dude! Here’s the door. Get screwed up on your own time.

Hey, if you aint doing it, why sweat it?

Finger printing was mentioned. I’ve got no problem with that either. All babies born are foot printed. Soon, they’ll start accumulating a DNA database, which, hopefully, will become mandatory. We spend too much money trying to convict the wrong people as it is. You ought to be glad to give them your prints or DNA so no one can cost you a few hundred thousand by accusing you of a crime you did not do.

Joe Smith gets hauled in by a faulty witness for rape. The lab does a DNA profile on him and discovers no match. He’s free. No extensive jail time, no $20,000 in lawyers, no one walking around saying he did it anyhow but had a ‘good lawyer,’ no doubts at all.

Jack Gray rapes a chick and no one believes her. The cops dig out his DNA chart, run the test and bingo! Match. Funny, he said he never had sex with her. He was fishing with his 6 buddies that night, who all said he was. Guess they were all lying. DNA doesn’t lie. Jack goes to jail. His 6 pals get charged with hampering a criminal investigation.

Guys like Freedom2 there want the law to protect them, but then do everything they can to make it easy for the crooks. If you’re not going to do a crime, why should you care if they have slugs from your armory, your prints on file, your DNA in record or cameras on the street corners?

Got something up your sleeve? Bombs in your basement? Illegal weapons stashed ‘just in case’? You own some stuff that’s not real legal, don’t you? Silencers? Exotic ammo?

BTW. The Bill of Rights is a magnificent document, but I doubt if the authors ever expected conditions to become what they are today. Modifications can be made without damaging the reason behind the bill. You have the right to bear arms – but not without registering them. You should not have the right to be able to buy weapons used by soldiers to kill other soldiers with because, you are not a soldier.

You’re not allowed to have duels anymore. Wiser brains than the general public decided that. You can’t go out wild west style and shoot each other in the middle of the street at high noon anymore. Wise brains decided that was not allowed. These same wise brains decided not to take away the weapons, and they could have. Currently, these wise brains say you can’t walk around sporting a cannon on your hip unless you have a permit, which I figure is a good idea.

Can you imagine Friday night at the Good Ol’ Boy Bar if these laws had not been passed?

17

TheMoonGazer,
Just because you wouldn’t mind living in a police state doesn’t mean that those of us who don’t “do everything they can to make it easy for the crooks”.

And please tell me, are you a soldier? What guns do you own that are (or were) not used by soldiers to kill other soldiers? Semi-automatic pistols and revolvers? Are now or were previously carried as sidearms by military personnel. Shotguns? Great for clearing trenches in WWI. I don’t think I have to explain rifles.

There are states were you do not need a permit to openly carry “a cannon on your hip”. Those Friday nights happen every week.

And back to the OP, would you really like to (on top of your regular registration fees) return each year to the police or controlling agency and pay to have your firearm test fired to track the wear on your firing pin and barrel? What purpose will it serve except to give prosecutors one more thing to add to a criminal’s list of offenses? Not only didn’t he register his firearm, the casings weren’t registered either. :rolleyes:

18

?

What a coincidence…mine aren’t, and I have no intention of killing anyone either.

Simple. So it’s one less thing to facilitate a socialist government from rounding me up and putting me in the concentration camps for “re-education”, if you want as facetious an answer as the question is put.

(“Pee Test” issue deleted)

An excellent idea. If you have nothing to hide, then you should not be allowed to use encryption. If you have nothing to hide, you will not object to a 24-hour wiretap on your phone. And if you have nothing to hide, you also will welcome openly the Smiling Policeman[sup]TM[/sup] who will come to visit your house for a random search once a month, you know, just to make sure everything is OK…

So being a good citizen, you have volunteered yours to the police already, yes?

:rolleyes: Not true.

Not if people who care at all about personal privacy and individual civil rights have anything to say about it.

(irrelevant Rape Analogy deleted)

Is that what he wants? Is that what I want? Cool - you have taken quite a load off of my mind. Of course, I do not yet have the Smiling Policeman[sup]TM[/sup] installed in my home to keep an eye on me yet, so I do need help determining what I have in mind…

:rolleyes:

But the ability to kill enemy soldiers was one of the founding reasons behind the Amendment…oh, never mind. I see where this is going.

You obviously have no grasp of the facts, and I’m guessing you are not a US citizen at all. I can, in fact, “walk around sporting a cannon on (my) hip” without a “permit”. The fact that you say this means you are incredibly ignorant of US firearms laws, or are wrongfully applying the “my town is the World” principle to this discussion. Learn about the subject some - reading is fundamental.

Just be glad I got here before UncleBeer.

19

Did they ever anticipate people posting inflammatory messages in message boards on the Internet? No. Better take away our Freedom of Speech.

Did they ever anticipate people gathering to protest a trade organization and “starting” riots? No. Better take away our Freedom of Assembly.

Did they ever anticipate people moving down to Jonestown and dying by the hundreds from poisoned Kool-Aid? No. Better take away our Freedom of Religion.

Did they ever anticipate mass corruption and unethical behavior among news and media organizations? No. Better take away our Freedom of the Press.

Did they ever anticipate schoolkids making pipe bombs in their basement and not giving any evidence of their intentions until it’s too late? No. Better take away our Freedom from unreasoable Search and Seizure.

It’s called an Amendment. If you want to counteract the 2nd Amendment, you need a new Amendment. This Maryland bill is NOT an Amendment.

They’re politicians. How wise can they be? :smiley:

“Wisdom” is not described as “tickling the specific fancy of TheMoonGazer.” It is the application of knowledge to a situation for a desired outcome. The expressed desired outcome is “stop crime”. As has been pointed out, this bill stands little chance of stopping much crime (at least, there hasn’t been much contention to that claim).

20

All of you freedom to bear nukes people: If your gun gets stolen, would you like to know that it has been used and where, so that you can round up your posse and get it back?