(June 2003) Our top issue this month is the state's continued illegal enforcement of a ban on most newly made handguns. At issue are products lacking what Maryland State Police say are IMSDs, "integrated mechanical safety devices." The supply of pre-03 handguns (those made before this law took effect) is drying up, and what few handguns are available have skyrocketted in price. More shops are on the way to closing for lack of products to sell. Our right to keep and bear arms may turn into an academic curiosity once there are no guns lawful for purchase.
Background. The law took effect January 1 as the parting gift from Parris Glendening. Its language is plain, and reflects a compromise reached when 'smart gun' mandates were stripped from the original bill. In place of high tech gizmos personalized to each user, the law only requires that each handgun have a safety which prevents the gun from accidental discharge. It is a simple 'consumer product safety' provision. Grip safeties, thumb safeties, hammer drop safeties - all meet the letter of the law. But that is not what the state is presently allowing.
What police enforce now is a campaign fiction created by Kathleen Kennedy and former Speaker Cas Taylor in the closing weeks of last year's election. In order not to look too extreme to voters, Kathleen and Cas concocted a story to soften the image of their upcoming IMSD ban. They said handguns could be available if dealers added aftermarket locks to existing guns. They showed example locks to suggest availability, then got the Handgun Roster Board to rubber stamp a policy of requiring such gizmos. And when voters asked KKT or Taylor about the bans, the pols waved their hands magnanimously and say "look, it's all business as usual, there is no ban."
Now business is anything but usual. Kennedy's policy was flawed even when it was introduced, but no surprise, their example locks are no longer marketted. They were sold only long enough to help KKT's fiction. What we're left with is a practice defined purely for campaign convenience, and only a handful of guns lawful for sale.
No relief in sight. To date the Ehrlich administration shows no sign of intervening to solve this problem. There is little hope of rolling back the law - that needs legislative action, which is not realistically on the horizon. We at least need fair enforcement of the existing law: MSP should verify an IMSD as measured by its full definition, not just the narrow construction adopted by anti-gunners during a campaign.
If the gun law's purpose was to influence gun manufacturers into designing fundamentally different products, then the state would have spoken to gun companies three years ago when the law was passed. Yet it did not, and the IMSD definition is clear. This is a consumer product safety matter which officials are misapplying.
Why no intervention from the administration? Apparently as a holdover from the campaign, Ehrlich's advisors remain afraid to involve themselves in firearm issues. As a result, Glendening's anti-gun machine remains free to operate on autopilot. By neglect, the Ehrlich administration is advancing the Glendening gun control agenda.
Gunowners wait for access to the administration. One rule of politics says "dance with the one who brought you." To date, Ehrlich's dance card is a question. At the Senate confirmation hearing of MSP Superintendent Ed Norris, representatives from the troopers' association thanked Ehrlich for having consulted with them prior to selecting Norris; yet GOP staff worked hard to ensure gunowner questions of this key appointee could not be asked. It seems as if someone thinks more troopers than gun owners voted for him.
Ehrlich came through for Maryland Sportsman Association by making personnel changes at DNR and signing MSA's hunting bills into law. Yet unlike most gun groups, MSA endorsed Kennedy and donated to her campaign. Last week Ehrlich fulfilled a campaign promise to the state poultry industry by removing heavy restrictions on waste disposal. On Ehrlich's list of priorities, we now know we rate below anti-gunners and chicken manure.
Senior administration staff members say firearm owners should be happy with the status quo. They point out how Kennedy would have led the charge for last session's gun control bills, as Ehrlich did not. That is true. Nevertheless we would have hoped for access, the chance to issue-educate, and equitable enforcement of existing law, not overreaching enforcement of the Glendening agenda. We remain frustrated but ever hopeful.