(November 1, 1999) "A Farewell to Arms." That's the title chosen by J. Joseph Curran for his manifesto on how to ban handguns from private hands in Maryland. He plagiarized a fitting title from Ernest Hemingway. 'Papa' Hemingway worked with the Loyalists in Spain's Civil War in the 1930's, so through his writing fought against fascism. He knew Curran's ilk well. But the tie ends there. 'Papa Joe' Curran is no Hemingway, and his rambling 63 page dissertation on how to achieve a final solution is more deserving of a title taken from one of Ted Kaczynski's published works.

More than likely you've already seen the press doing jubilant backflips over Curran's proposal. He is on the warpath for Sarah Brady and Bill Clinton, proposing to introduce legislation in January which would flatly ban citizens from possessing handguns. Period. And until he achieves this goal, he seeks authority to mandate licensing of any current handgun owners (including fingerprinting, extensive background checks and an evaluation of mental stability for you to own the gun); he wants to open the floodgates for his trial lawyer buddies to sue anyone connected with firearms, especially manufacturers and dealers; he wants freedom for police to conduct extensive surveillance and wiretapping operations to flush out people with guns, all without pesky little details like court orders; he promises to "change the gun culture in America."

His report is ripe with deceit and misdirection, starting with the cover itself: The graphic image displays a montage of newspaper headlines about gun violence in Maryland, presumably crying the need for redress. A close look shows none of the material originated in Maryland. Curran's propagandists at the Violence Policy Center and HCI fed him advertising and he simply used it without bothering to read what it was. The document goes down hill from there.

We'll have more analysis in future newsletters (we need to save up our postage to tell you how much is wrong with this atrocity!) but here's just one of the points he raises. Curran says: "Lawbreakers Should Not Own Handgun ... Any Misdemeanor Conviction [should be used] as a Bar to Gun Ownership." That's a slogan to use in front of an unthinking public, but look at examples of what will, under Curran, preclude lawful possession of a gun:

Littering [Art. 27, Sec. 468]; Operating a boat at a speed of more than six knots on Seneca Creek [Art. 27, Sec. 21(b)]; Hunting without permission on private land in Anne Arundel County [Art. 27, Sec. 268B]; Trespassing upon cultivated land [Art. 27, Sec. 579B]; Selling nonlatex condoms from a vending machine [Art. 27, Sec. 41]

Hard to believe, but it's true: If you're guilty of either a common traffic offense or litering, Joe Curran wants to treat you like a violent predator who can be given hard mandatory sentences for subsequent possession of a gun. The technology - and attitude - of State Police is such that their Cease Fire unit could be at your door with a warrant to confiscate your guns before you got home from the court house after paying a fine.

Under current law, anyone disqualified to own a handgun who is found to possess one anyway serves 5 years in jail after a $10,000 fine. After Curran gets his way, the act of throwing an empty cigarette pack out the window of your car in front of a state cop could cost you and your family dearly. You'd never know it from reading Curran's report, but remember current law disqualifies you from possessing any gun or ammunition if you have ever been convicted of any crime that could have been punished by a jail term of one year and a day. This is already a tough standard that trips people up in surprising ways. [Last month we promised you an article on how police are enforcing existing gun laws, saying "be careful what you ask for." This article was bumped for the more pressing news this month, but we will explore the issues in detail shortly.]

Current law makes no distinction between felony or misdemeanor in disqualifying you from owning a gun, and need not apply only to predatory crimes. What are surprising examples? Mail fraud (this leaves out a highly paid lobbyist in Annapolis) and theft of cable service (prosecuted under malicious destruction of property.) If you have one such conviction on your record and then apply to buy any firearm at any location in the country, you'll be denied on your Brady check and counted as an evildoer stopped from getting a gun. If what you tried to buy was a handgun, then MSP now mandates referral of your case to a state's attorney for investigation and prosecution. This policy gives no room for negotiation. You see, by saying you were eligible on the form even though you were not, you committed perjury, and the state wants you in jail. If you show up in the state handgun database as already having purchased a regulated firearm since October 1, 1996, then (because of the ban on private transfer) police use that evidence as the basis to conduct a raid and find out how many other guns you might possess in violation of the law. (Always remember, the only reason for gun registration is gun confiscation.)

And that's all under current law being applied today. Imagine what this will look like under Curran.