Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, February 10, 1993 TAG: 9302100074
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-2 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: MARGARET EDDS STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: Medium
BIG DIFFERENCE IN BILLS IS IN THE LANGUAGE
Political rhetoric aside, less than meets the eye separates the two versions of one-handgun-a-month legislation passing through the General Assembly.The chief practical difference is that the compromise approved by Gov. Douglas Wilder and passed Tuesday by the Senate specifically exempts purchases for "lawful business or personal use" from the limit. It also spells out in greater detail how the purchase plan would work.
The chief philosophical difference is that Wilder's original bill, passed by the House of Delegates, gives police greater leeway to reject suspicious buyers. However, an argument can be made that the discretionary powers are similar.
There also is a difference in the philosophical starting points of the two bills. The compromise draws heavily from a Republican bill that was grounded in a basic belief: Law-abiding citizens should not be restricted from purchasing multiple handguns. There was no such underpinning to the original Wilder bill, although drafters did not object to making exceptions to the one-a-month rule for legitimate buyers.
"We're talking about tinkering with two good proposals. Nothing less than a strong law is going to pass in this state under either proposal," said David Weaver, a lobbyist for Handgun Control Inc., based in Washington D.C.
A close reading of the two bills reveals these differences and similarities:
Both bills would make it unlawful for a person who is not a licensed firearm dealer to buy more than one handgun in a 30-day period.
The original bill says anyone wanting to buy more must file an application, listing the number and type of firearms, on forms provided by the state police. It doesn't say who would receive the forms or how they'd be approved, except that the state police superintendent would come up with regulations.
Under the compromise, multiple purchasers would apply to state police, listing the number and type of guns sought and the purpose of the purchase. They would sign the application under oath and have to provide "satisfactory proof" of residency and identity. Additional details also would be set by the state police.
Both bills exempt purchasers of antique firearms and individuals who've had a gun lost or stolen. The original bill lists four additional exemptions: "handguns in a collector's series, for collections, as bulk purchases from estate sales and for similar purposes." What constitutes a "similar purpose" would be decided by state police.
The compromise bill spells out one additional exemption: "lawful business or personal use." Examples cited by proponents of who might qualify are an owner of five jewelry stores who wanted to buy one gun for each store, or an individual who wanted to give five relatives guns for Christmas.
Neither bill puts any limit on the number of guns that could be bought under an approved multiple purchase.
The critical philosophical difference in the bills, according to the Handgun Control Inc. lobbyist, is in language spelling out how police should respond to applications. The original bill says only that multiple purchases "may be made" through the special application.
The compromise, consistent with the original Republican aim, says police "shall forthwith issue" approved applications. Language added during negotiations with Wilder specifies that issuance will come "only after police are satisfied that these requirements have been met."
Finally, the compromise bill spells out that approved applicants will be given a seven-day certificate allowing them to make multiple handgun purchases. It specifies that state police can designate local police departments to accept applications and issue certificates.
Again, there is nothing specific about such details in the original bill. It says only that the state superintendent of police would work out the procedure.