BERKELEY, California - April 8, 2008 - An East Bay
lawmaker's bill to clear the way for local handgun bans has a committee hearing
today, delving into issues now pending before the state and nation's highest
courts.
Assemblywoman Loni Hancock,
D-Berkeley, authored Assembly Bill 2566 in reaction to a state Court of Appeal
ruling in January which upheld the voiding of San Francisco's Measure H of
2005, approved by voters to bar city residents from owning handguns or from
making or selling firearms or ammunition in the city.
The California Supreme Court is
mulling whether to review this ruling, which found state law leaves no room for
cities and counties to ban handgun ownership; Hancock's bill, to be heard today
by the Assembly Public Safety Committee, seeks to create that room by removing
the state pre-emption entirely.
Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban is
now the subject of the biggest gun-rights case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court
in almost 70 years. The high court will rule by late June on whether the Second
Amendment protects an individual's right to gun ownership, rather than just a
collective right to guns for the common defense as part of a state militia.
Richmond activist Andres Soto said the Legal Community
Against Violence - a San Francisco nonprofit that helped draft the bill -
believes that case won't directly affect this bill because of Washington's
status as a federal district, distinct from the states. Soto said he sees this
as "a domestic disarmament" crucial to the East Bay's gun-plagued
communities.
Hancock said the bill is inspired
by victims such as an Oakland boy hit by a stray bullet and paralyzed while at
his piano lesson and a Richmond woman shot and killed in her doorway by a gang
member.
Handguns are "weapons of mass
destruction in some of our inner cities," she said, and local governments
need this tool at their disposal to quell the violence.
"Many times when enough
individual local governments take an action, state action follows and federal
action follows," Hancock said. "It's the people on the ground
experiencing the problem every day that tend to be innovative and want to push
the envelope, and I've seen the communities I represent staggering under the
burden of gun violence for too long."
Gun-rights activists disagree.
"Aside from the fact that,
obviously, disarming civilians and depriving them of the most effective tool
there is for self-defense or defending their families, its not a good policy
decision," said California Rifle and Pistol Association attorney Chuck Michel
of Long Beach.
"The law is confusing enough
as it is right now," he said, with the California Law Revision Commission
already studying the need to simplify and reorganize Penal Code sections
dealing with deadly weapons; that panel's report is due by July 2009.
"The reason they passed
pre-emption in the first place was so people wouldn't have to worry about
violating a different set of laws every time they drove across a city
line," Michel said. "Uniformity is very important."
Soto said that's "a red
herring," as this bill wouldn't affect existing state laws on handgun
transportation but rather would let cities bar residents from owning handguns.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office said Monday he has
not yet taken a position on this bill.
Ed. Note: Do a site search at www.freedomradio.us for "Assemblyman Schwartz". Read the fictional story, "The Strange Disappearance of Assemblyman Schwartz".