Baltimore's incoming mayor wants tougher gun laws ...

[spin]

Baltimore's incoming mayor, Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake, pressed Annapolis lawmakers to toughen state gun laws at a packed hearing Tuesday before the House Judiciary Committee, saying "we have to do more" to build on successes in reducing crime.

****snip****

The legislation she supports would broaden an offense known as "use of a handgun in commission of a crime." Police now frequently add it to other charges in violent gun crimes. However, the statute allows the charge only if a handgun is used; other firearms such as rifles and shotguns are not included.

"Why should someone who walks into a convenience store and robs it with a shotgun or a long gun be subject to less jail time then someone who robs that very same store with a handgun?" Rawlings-Blake asked. "Both crimes are egregious, and the penalties should be the same."

Committee members used the hearing to voice broader frustration with the criminal justice system, with Del. Michael D. Smigiel Sr. asking for information about the number of Baltimore gun offenders whom judges punish with maximum sentences.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bal-md.guns03feb03,0,7203271.story?track=rss

[Tim01]

1. I try to avoid Maryland if I can. nt

[rd_kent]

2. Perhaps just make the existing laws on robbery and other crimes tougher and more enforced?

Why should a robbery with a gun be worse than a robbery at the same store with a knife?

Crime is crime, and should be punished severely, regardless of the instrument used.

[MisterBill45]

3. Precisely

If we'd eliminate parole, stop incarcerating people for victimless crimes and insist on determinate sentencing we'd do a lot to reduce violent crime. And robbery, strong-arm or armed, is a crime of violence, not a property crime.

Maybe if these guys all went away for a long stretch in the state pen their friends would get the message and find other ways to make a buck. Hell, I'd rather have them focusing on property crimes that don't hurt physically people than violent crimes if I had to choose.

The revolving door justice system, stacking of crimes in hopes of a better plea-bargaining position and use of probation and parole for violent crime is disgraceful. Hurt someone, and you go away for a long time. EVERY time. Do that and the whole "use a gun" thing is moot.

[spin]

4. These are the types of tougher gun laws that I can support ...

and an approach like this will be one hell of a lot more effective at reducing crime than an another "assault weapons" ban.

[eqfan592]

5. Here's my question....

...why should somebody who robs another person at knife point be subjected to less jail time than somebody who robs someone with a gun? Why should anybody who uses ANY sort of threat of physical violence other than a firearm receive less jail time than somebody who robs with a firearm?

[oneshooter]

8. Because Knives, clubs, and battery acid

Are not "bad". Gunz are BAD. People who use knives, clubs and battery acid to commit a crime are not "bad" people. The badgunz tend to take over their simple minds and cause them to do bad things. The people are not bad, it is the power of the mind controlling GUNZ!!!:sarcasm:

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[farmout rightarm]

6. I'm amazed that MD doesn't have typical laws making "armed robbery" and/or

"robbery by force and fear" class A felonies. There can't be more than 1 or 2 states that haven't classified
them that way for many years...
shrug

[benEzra]

7. That sounds reasonable to me.

It's nice to see a Maryland politician talk about going after gun-using criminals for a change.

[gorfle]

9. Sounds OK to me from the article.

Sounds OK to me. If they want to give out harsher penalties for people who commit crimes using firearms, sounds good to me.

[rd_kent]

10. Why? Why not give harsh penalties for anyone who just plain commits a crime?

Why should someone get a stiffer penalty for using a gun instead of a knife, or a club, or whatever?

[gorfle]

11. That's fine with me, too.

If you want to make it generic so that committing a crime with any weapon is punished more harshly because of using a weapon, that's fine by me.

But I have no problem with punishing people who commit crimes with firearms more harshly than people who commit the same crime without a firearm.

Firearms make the application of deadly force easy. People who use this as a lever to make their crimes easier should pay a penalty for it.

[PavePusher]

12. I think it would violate the "equal protection" premise, at least under strict scrutiny. n/t

[wjbarricklow]

13. a caveat

We have a law in FL called 10-20-life. It's mandatory sentencing for crimes involving firearms. A guy who goes nuts and assaults someone with a machete can end up with probation, but an honest guy with a firearms who misjudges (or if the jury misjudges) a self defense situation can find himself with a mandatory 3 years for aggravated assault.

Just remember that with a law like you have proposed in MD, that's one more hurdle to beat if you find yourself in an iffy self defense situation.

IMHO, it's better for the courts to figure out who the real criminals are and put them in prison for a long time.

My $.02 worth, and I'll leave it up to the people who live in MD. Boss asked me if I wanted to work in VA, MS or MD. Virginia was an easy choice.

[eqfan592]

14. That's a real good point there. Thanks. (nt)

:toast:

[spin]

15. Welcome to DU. (n/t)