Posted on 12/30/2005 6:23:22 PM PST by kerryusama04
SACRAMENTO - For state Sen. Jack Scott, New Year's Day will mark another milestone in a personal crusade to prevent accidental shootings like the one that killed his son, Adam.
"There's nothing I can do to bring back Adam, but I can do everything within my power to see that other families don't have to experience this tragedy," said Scott, D-Altadena.
Adam Scott, a 27-year-old law school graduate, died in October 1993 while attending a Los Angeles party with friends. The host showed off a gun and it accidentally fired.
Jack Scott's Senate Bill 489 -- a 2003 bill that takes effect Sunday -- is touted by gun-control groups as first-of-its-kind legislation.
The measure targets a specific kind of accidental shooting, involving a single unspent round fired from a handgun thought to be unloaded.
Semiautomatic pistols rechamber a bullet with each pull of the trigger, so a user can detach the magazine, believe the gun is empty, pull the trigger and only then discover that a live round was in the chamber.
Under SB 489, new models of rim-fire semiautomatic pistols introduced to the California market after Sunday must have a disconnect mechanism to prevent firing when the magazine is removed. These models generally fire .22-caliber ammunition.
New center-fire semiautomatics after New Year's Day must be equipped with either a magazine disconnect mechanism or a chamber load indicator that warns of an unspent round. These models typically use 9 mm and other such rounds.
In one year -- by January 2007 -- all new center-fire models must contain both safety devices.
Technology mandated by SB 489 is not new and some guns already carry it, but Scott's bill sets a national precedent for future use.
Adam Scott was killed by a shotgun, not a pistol, so the devices required by SB 489 would not have saved his life. But Scott said his ultimate goal is to make all guns safer and reduce accidental shootings of all types.
"It's very clear that when we have a dangerous product we should do everything we can to protect the public," he said.
Accidental shootings in California caused 68 deaths, 658 hospitalized injuries and represented 10 percent of all shootings in 2003, the most recent year for which state statistics are available.
Opponents claim the new law will do little or nothing to curb gun accidents. The law affects only a small portion of the roughly 300,000 to 350,000 guns sold annually in California.
SB 489 exempts existing handguns, future person-to-person sales, and new models of shotguns, rifles and revolvers.
Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, said SB 489 is another in a long line of "harassment" measures by gun opponents.
"They'll do everything and anything they can to make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to own, possess, acquire, enjoy or use firearms," Paredes said.
Terence Cooper, 27, and Matt Brewer, 19, semiautomatic pistol owners approached randomly at Cordova Shooting Center, had differing opinions about SB 489.
Cooper's 9 mm contains the two safety measures and he claims they're valuable.
"I think so, for safety, as far as (protecting) children or someone who has never really fired a gun," he said.
But Brewer, whose 9 mm pistol does not contain the devices, said he knows of no driving demand within the gun community for change.
"You can't legislate responsibility," Brewer said.
Nationwide, the number of accidental shootings has fallen consistently for the past two decades, without such mandates.
About 700 people died in the United States from accidental shootings in 2003, down from 1,695 in 1983, said Alan Hoskin of the National Safety Council.
No other state requires new semiautomatic pistols to have both chamber load indicators and magazine disconnect mechanisms. Massachusetts requires use of one or the other, said attorney Laura Cutilletta of Legal Community Against Violence, which tracks firearm laws.
Chuck Michel, spokesman for the California Rifle and Pistol Association, said that simply installing a load indicator does not prevent accidental shootings by someone ignorant about guns.
"If you're smart enough to know what a chamber load indicator means, you're smart enough to know how to tell if a gun's loaded without one," he said. "The only way to make a gun foolproof is to educate the fool."
Critics of SB 489 contend that a magazine disconnect mechanism could exacerbate danger in certain situations.
Lawrence G. Keane, of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute, describes a scenario in which the disconnect mechanism could produce a tragically false sense of security.
Keane envisions an incident in which the user detaches the magazine, finds the gun won't fire and concludes it carries no bullets. He or she then reattaches an empty magazine, continues to believe it is unloaded, and pulls the trigger -- accidentally firing a chambered round.
Keane said there are pros and cons to such safety devices. Manufacturers do not necessarily oppose them, but they oppose a mandate, he said.
"We think those decisions should be made by consumers, not the Legislature," Keane said.
A majority of semiautomatic pistols currently do not contain one or both of the safety devices mandated by SB 489, Keane said.
Law enforcement agencies, exempt from the new law, are split on the use of magazine disconnect mechanisms. Some view them as beneficial, while others fear they could endanger an officer unable to fire a chambered round while replacing magazines.
The California Highway Patrol uses firearms that contain magazine disconnect mechanisms, but the San Francisco Police Department and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, among others, do not.
"If you were holding a suspect at gunpoint or were in the middle of a gunfight and you needed to reload your pistol, during the few seconds it takes, your pistol would be inoperable," said Los Angeles Sheriff's Sgt. Dave Nell.
Firearms firms forced to redesign their handguns to comply with SB 489 could incur millions of dollars in development costs, potentially increasing prices between $5 and $50, although it is difficult to estimate with certainty, Keane said.
Scott said he doesn't place much credence in what he considers opponents' far-fetched claims of safety problems created by SB 489.
An unlikely chain of events can be envisioned to fight any safety measure, including seat belts, which conceivably could trap someone inside a submerged car, Scott said.
"There's no safety measure that's going to be perfect, but we normally operate on the basis of what statistics indicate is a safe way to go," he said.
Scott conceded that SB 489 excludes a significant segment of the firearm market, but he said it was impractical or infeasible to retrofit existing guns or target other models.
Technically, SB 489 exempts from its mandate for a disconnect mechanism any new semiautomatic pistol lacking a detachable magazine, but few such models are anticipated.
Griffin Dix, father of a 15-year-old boy killed in the type of shooting targeted by SB 489, predicted the bill "gradually will save more and more lives."
To Dix, a Bay Area resident now serving as president of California chapters of the Million Mom March, the new law is a no-brainer.
"Why shouldn't you have a device that tells a gun owner that there's a bullet still in the chamber?" he asked.
"The only way to make a gun foolproof is to educate the fool."
For the record, I'm a big fan of the loaded chamber indicator but can see the down side and sure don't like new gun laws - or old ones for that matter.
Yep. Properly clearing one's weapon when finished using it solves the problem every time.
A gun is only as safe as the nut on the trigger.
No gun "accidentally fires." The host was a frickin' idiot and deserves to be prosecuted under existing laws.
New laws do nothing to prevent the sheer stupidity the "host" demonstrated.
If the Liberals hadn't stigmatized gun ownership to the point that most people don't even have passable knowledge the three basics of gun safety, none of this would have happened.
Why? It'll make idiots no smarter than the "safety" on guns do today.
It did not acidently fire. It fired because ther was a round in the chamber and some idiot pulled the trigger.
Give this secret technique a try. Point the gun down, but not at your feet. Rack the slide to the rear, and inspect the chamber.
It's just that simple.
I do that any time I handle a handgun, even if I 'know' that it's unloaded. If that's too much trouble for you, then you shouldn't handle firearms, much less own one.
Amen.
The down side is that if you are empty the bad guy might know it too.
But they can legistlate irresponsibly and usually do.
I did't know that 19 year olds could legally possess handgns.
Um, gun safety laws (also called the laws of physics) took effect the day guns were invented.
Yep, that one is up there with "SUV Kills Three Pedestrians".
Anyone, ANYONE, who points a real firearm in the direction of a person in a careless manner is beyond the reach of safety legislation.
Because a responsible gun owner knows to check his chamber before handling any gun. If the idiot didn't know to do that a loaded chamber indicator won't help.
I've actually had guys at the range ask me why the little "light" on top of their pistol keeps going out. How is the indicator helping these idiots?AWB
I have sent all my guns to school. They know better than to fire accidentally. They also know that if the do fire accidentally they will be severly punished.
What light would this be? A loaded chamber indicator is usually part of the extractor working on a hinge.
The problem with this legislation is it will make some people rely on such indicators rather than eye balling it for themselves. Of course, pointing an "unloaded" gun at anyone is an act of irresponsibility in the extreme.
I guess if it makes Scott feel better we should just roll over and give up our rights of self defense...
How much will this add to price of a hand gun?
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.