(August 8, 2000) October 1, the date when Glendening's new gun law takes effect, is fast approaching. So far there is little guidance on how Maryland State Police intend to enforce the wild, ambiguous and in some cases just plain absurd language in the bill which passed. The law's mandate that a fired case be provided with each handgun sold into the state (this is for "ballistic fingerprinting") gets particular attention. This could end up a de facto gun ban.

We're pestering manufacturers for their intentions on Maryland's law, and based on responses to date, consumers won't have much selection. Glock gave us the strongest response; they don't yet know particulars but intend to meet the requirement. (They are already well on their way to implementing a similar project with the Federal government, whereby they will provide fired rounds to the FBI for all guns sold. Given that they are already addressing the labor-intensive task of keeping evidence sorted, it seems reasonable they are closest to meeting additional requirements.)

But other manufacturers were either unaware of the upcoming mandate for cases, or, off the record, expressed that they were unlikely to change their processes to meet Maryland's requirements. Smaller manufacturers in particular (makers of commemoratives, high-end target or custom defense guns) show no sign of being able to comply. Also, no manufacturer contacted expressed an expectation that they would accept products back to fire and return with a shell case. This question arises because the bill language makes no provision for products already on dealer shelves as of enactment. Bottom line? As of today, no manufacturer meets the letter of the new law.

[No companies contacted knew what to make of the requirement that handguns include "integral mechanical safety devices" starting 2002. Smith & Wesson, whose deal with the Clinton administration helped implement gun control here, stated they have a general expectation of meeting the requirement, since that was part of their federal deal. But that having been said, they have not received any more guidance than anyone else on how police will enforce it. This is no surprise: none of the legislators voting on this could understand it either, as we've documented previously.]