Posted on 09/01/2011 1:53:42 PM PDT by neverdem
A decade ago the State of California enacted a law mandating virtually any handgun model sold in the state must undergo testing by an Independent Handgun Test Laboratory before it would be allowed on the market. This is the story of one of those laboratories.
The Justification
The 1990s saw a rise of gun-related legislation at the municipal and county level throughout California. “Enlightened” politicians passed ordinances banning the sale of “Saturday Night Specials” within their jurisdictions. While varied and confusing to the extreme, these laws all had something in common: they tried banning something that couldn’t be adequately described. Analogous to the 1964 pornography opinion issued by Justice Stewart (“I don’t know how to define it, but I know it when I see it.”), even the most gun-savvy were unable to come up with a workable definition of “Saturday Night Special.”
The problem grew to a point where the state legislature stepped in and enacted SB15, calling for mandatory testing of almost every handgun model sold in California. With a rigorous procedure including massive firing and drop testing, lawmakers figured that those guns they “knew” would ultimately qualify as “SNS” would fail the tests and ultimately be banned from sale in the state. Sounded good to the politicians and liberals.
In a tribute to legalese, those guns successfully tested would be reported to DOJ as being “Not Unsafe.” My guess is that no politicians anywhere would ever want their names associated with anything that would claim a firearm was “Safe.” The semantics of politics never fail to boggle the mind.
The Licensing
SB15 was passed in the late 90s, with an implementation date of January 1, 2000. The California DOJ, Bureau of Firearms, was tasked with establishing criteria for the licensing of Independent Handgun Test Laboratories. My business partner...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanhandgunner.com ...
And criminals who can’t steal.
These laws all had something in common: they tried banning something that couldn’t be adequately described.
Sort of like the “Assault Weapon” ban?
When words have no meaning they can mean anything.
The government can overreach all it wants because just about everything could be considered an “Assault Weapon”.
California politicians have never been able to live down the fact that in 1982 the VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY rejected a handgun ban on the ballot, so the politicians are always looking for a backdoor method to make guns illegal.
To meet the "Not Unsafe" requirements, liberals took a great little pistol, the Ruger Mark II series and turned it into a cleaning nightmare with their magazine disconnect concept. Adding the loaded chamber indicator was the cherry topping the liberal cream.
I expect their next requirement will be the twist of a key, with your off hand, to bring the weapon into battery after each discharge.
Why would you want a weapon that wasn't dangerous?
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.