HR1423 Childproof Handgun Act of 2005

I want to draw your attention to a bill introduced in the House on March 17, 2005.

This bill would make it a felony to manufacture, sell, transfer or deliver any handgun which cannot be "personalized".

Huh? You mean it has custom stocks?

No, silly. "Personalized" means that it can't be fired by anyone but the owner or other authorized person.

In general, it's an amendment to Section 922 of Section 18 of the United States Code.

Here's the money quote:

(b) Personalized Defined- Section 921(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(36) The term `personalized' means, with respect to a handgun, that integral to the handgun is a device or feature that--

`(A) allows the handgun to be fired only by a particular individual;

`(B) is not capable of being readily deactivated; and

`(C) may allow the handgun to be personalized to 1 or more additional individuals.'.

(c) Penalty- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(z) shall be fined not more than $500,000, imprisoned not more than 18 months, or both. The fine otherwise applicable under section 3571 shall not apply to an offense under section 922(z).'.

You can read the full text of the House bill here.

There's one iota of common sense in the bill. It directs the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study to determine whether it is technically possible commercially feasible to create such a handgun within 5 years after enactment of the bill. The study will consider:

(c) Commercial Feasibility- In determining whether the technology involved in personalizing firearms is commercially feasible, the Comptroller General shall consider the following factors:

(1) The reliability of the technology utilized in personalized firearms.

(2) The difference between the manufacturer's suggested retail price for personalized firearms and the manufacturer's suggested retail price for equivalent firearms that are not personalized.

(3) Such other criteria as the Comptroller General deems appropriate.

Two thoughts, and no more:

1. This bill would require extensive and expensive modifications to millions of handguns already in the hands of private citizens.
2. The penalty of a half-million dollars and 18 months in the pokey seems excessive, in a bill which fails to include a 'grandfather' clause.

This bill has been on the books for almost six months, and it isn't going anywhere. Chances are it never WILL 'go anywhere', because it's a piece of work which appeals only to low-life incompetents who get themselves elected to the U.S. Legislature for personal reasons entirely unrelated to the desire to provide intelligent leadership.

The reason this bill is featured here is to acquaint you with the people responsible for this boondogle . . and boondogle it is, as those of us who keep track of the technology know that such a criteria could never pass any reasonable test.

(This technological criteria ignores the fact that many of us who own firearms store them safely in a household containing children, and have done so for years, because we make the children safe, not the firearms.)

Here are the sponsors:

Mr. PASCRELL (for himself, [D-NJ]
Mrs. MCCARTHY, [D-NY]
Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island, [D-RI]
Mr. WEINER, [D-NY]
Mr. DELAHUNT, [D-MA]
Mr. PAYNE, [D-NJ]
Mrs. MALONEY, [D-NY]
Mr. CAPUANO, [D-MA]
and Ms. SCHAKOWSKY) [D-IL]

These are the 'hopefuls', those who 'hope' that technology will rescue them from the Evil Gun.

I am shocked . . . SHOCKED . . . to learn that all of the sponsors of this bill are DemocRats from the New England States, with the sole exception of a DemocRat from Illinois.

Who knew that these people were a bunch of agenda-driven, know-nothing elitists? I certainly didn't.

If you look at the links, clicking on their name takes you to their House website. Clicking on the party-state takes you to snailmail contact information.

What you do with this information is up to you. Personally, if I lived on the North-Eastern Seaboard or Illinois I would be writing to these reps and trying to clue them into the fact that Technology and Gun Control doesn't save us from "Hand Gun Violence". There are a lot of other, much more difficult measures which can be taken (control of gangs, encouraging the maintenance of 'nuclear families' with two parents present, elimination of the Welfare Bonus for single moms, etc etc etc) and they may help reduce the HUMAN tendency to violence.

(Technical measures to offset human tendencies rarely work, if ever.)

Actually, if I lived on the North-Eastern Seaboard or Illinois, I would probably be scrambling to move to another climate; one which is represented more ably in Congress.

Oregon isn't perfect, but at least these idiots don't live there.