Untraceable guns, untraceable crime
June 25, 2008
According to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, gun dealers nationwide “lost” an average of at least 82 firearms every day last year. For all of fiscal year 2007, this adds up to a grand total of more than 30,000 firearms that cannot be accounted for in dealers’ inventories. The Brady Center analyzed this month’s data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which led to these disturbing figures.
Untraceable guns are the perfect fit for criminals seeking to become untraceable themselves. That’s why the law already requires dealers to keep records of the guns it sells, and to whom. And gun laws aside, tracking inventory should be basic shopkeepers’ math. It doesn’t seem like that should be too much to ask of any honest, moral gun dealer.
Unfortunately, an enforcement agency like the ATF doesn’t have the resources to inspect every single gun store across the country. Between untraceable guns and legislative loopholes (like the fact that our government has failed to require gun shows to implement a thorough background check on customers), gun control looks more and more like an exercise in futility.
As a person who grew up in a house with guns, and whose father took the license to have such a weapon very seriously, I would hope there are many law-abiding gun owners out there who would not see more stringent enforcement of inventory regulations as an assault on the Second Amendment. Besides, according to that very amendment, even the militia “necessary to the security of a free State” is “well regulated.”
Francis Smith, Special Publications Assistant Editor
Sphere: Related ContentRoss Perot calls for “action this day”
June 16, 2008
Don’t count out Ross Perot.
The former presidential candidate has stepped into the spotlight again with the launch of a new Web site on “government fiscal irresponsibility.”
Think of it as a place for him to keep his economic charts - the ones he became famous for using in his campaigns for the presidency, including the 30-minute television timeslots he bought (like this one in October 1992).
In a welcome video on PerotCharts.com, Perot says gravely - in his Texas drawl - “We live in the greatest country in the history of man. We’ve been so successful for so long that we now take our success for granted. Not since the Great Depression have we seen an economic crisis of the magnitude that we are facing today.”
Much of his attention focuses on the national debt, which he says is growing by more than $1 billion each day. Mandatory spending programs such as Social Security and Medicare, he says, are only going to get costlier as the Baby Boomer population ages. Perot asserts that unless we solve these fundamental issues, the country won’t be able to meet future challenges.
In case you begin to feel downtrodden about the wealth of information the billionaire shares, he notes: “The good news is that Americans are resilient and resourceful, and have always responded unselfishly in a crisis.”
To view his Web presentation, “Suicidal Spending,” click here.
JACKIE SAUTER, Web Editor
Sphere: Related ContentA surprise guest at the BPW
June 12, 2008
There was an unusual substitution at Wednesday’s meeting of the Board of Public Works.
Gov. Martin O’Malley was flanked by Treasurer Nancy Kopp and Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown — instead of Comptroller Peter Franchot.
O’Malley and Franchot have been known to snipe at each other at BPW meetings, sometimes coming down on different sides of spending issues. They had some particularly unpleasant interactions last summer over some land acquisitions for state conservation programs. O’Malley and Brown, on the other hand, shared a ticket in 2006 and seem to get along just fine.
During the opening of Wednesday’s meeting, Brown noted that he was not the comptroller, but thanked O’Malley for the introduction.
“I thank you,” O’Malley quipped. Everybody got a kick out of that one.
ANDY ROSEN, Business Writer
Sphere: Related ContentLobbyists have feelings, too
June 6, 2008
So you want to make sure lawmakers are paying attention to your point of view. Maybe there’s a bill that will affect your business, or maybe something affecting your industry has become a hot legislative topic. What do you do? Probably hire a lobbyist if you have the cash.
Lobbyists can help people who don’t have the time to get to Washington, Annapolis or whatever seat of government they’re trying to influence. I’ve seen them operate in Maryland, and they’re pretty busy. So what happens when lobbyists need to go to bat for their own industry?
Well, they turn to The American League of Lobbyists, a trade organization that monitors ethics laws and other decisions that affect their industry.
Yes. Lobbyists have their own lobbyists.
And today, many lobbyists are upset about the way John McCain and Barack Obama are treating the profession in their campaigns. If you haven’t been watching, these campaigns have been competing to see who can disavow more lobbyists in a shorter period of time. They’re both trying to keep campaign staffs free of professional advocates, and they’re not being quiet about it.
Friday, the league reminded voters that “lobbyists are citizens, too.”
Here’s a little excerpt from a news release issued in the morning:
“Presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain have declared Washington lobbyists persona non grata as far as participation in the forthcoming campaigns. The leadership of the American League of Lobbyists (ALL) vehemently objects to this treatment. ALL reminds the candidates that all U.S. citizens are guaranteed the right to petition the government under the First Amendment to the Constitution.”
“As a profession, lobbying is an easy target and a candidate automatically garners public support with each declaration,” said Brian Pallasch, League President.
ANDY ROSEN, Business Writer
Sphere: Related ContentSlideshow: Ehrlich’s portrait unveiling
June 4, 2008
Last night’s portrait unveiling, held at St. John’s College in Annapolis, was heavy on tradition and relatively light on politics, according to the AP.
Reporter Brian Witte writes:
 |
| Ehrlich portrait unveiling |
“It’s not about looking to the future,” Ehrlich told reporters before the event. “It’s about celebrating a great first lady and obviously our administration, but we’re really not going to be discussing anything about the future this evening.”
He continues:
The audience of more than 600 was obviously pro-Ehrlich and applauded loudly and yelled “four more years” and “2010″ as the former governor was introduced.
The event was emceed by Edward Norris, who played a role in both O’Malley’s mayoral administration in Baltimore and Ehrlich’s cabinet. Norris was O’Malley’s police commissioner until he was tapped by Ehrlich to be the head of the Maryland State Police in 2003. Norris resigned from the state police after being indicted in a federal probe and served six months in prison for misusing city police funds in Baltimore.
Sphere: Related ContentIs the best way to a lawmaker’s heart through his stomach?
May 28, 2008
In 1999, Maryland prohibited lobbyists from buying meals for lawmakers as part of an ethics reform law. Pretty simple, right? Well, not according to Tuesday’s Washington Post.
The Post reports that Maryland lobbyists spent nearly $1 million during the course of this year’s General Assembly session on meals for groups of lawmakers. The practice is allowed for delegations and committees, but not for individuals.
Some lobbyists argue that the meals are a valuable (and definitely legal) way to get some time to discuss their key issues with the people who are making decisions on them. Still, it takes a lot of juice to be able to drop $3,700 at an Annapolis steakhouse. Not just anyone can do it.
Let’s not forget, though, that lobbyists are also allowed to make campaign contributions so long as they report them.
It’s certainly an interesting debate. Are the group meals OK by you? And if so, would you support allowing lobbyists to buy meals for individual legislators again?
ANDY ROSEN, Business Writer
Sphere: Related ContentMaryland, helping military leave
May 22, 2008
Most of the talk about military families in Maryland these days has to do with making it easier for people to move here with their jobs as part of the Base Realignment and Closure process. But Gov. Martin O’Malley took a step Thursday that could also make things easier for military families who have to move away.
At his final bill signing, O’Malley signed a bill that would make people eligible for unemployment benefits if they quit a job to follow a spouse in the military. Typically, unemployment insurance is not available to people who leave jobs by choice, but this will be a new exception in state law.
Potentially, these unemployment claims could raise premiums for some businesses that otherwise wouldn’t have seen former employees collect benefits, but on the whole it’s likely to have a small effect on the state’s unemployment system. According to the Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, more than 300 people in the state were unable to collect benefits after following a military spouse in fiscal 2007.
ANDY ROSEN, Business Writer
Sphere: Related ContentDrilling for answers
May 22, 2008
According to the Associated Press, U.S. Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-Frederick) has dropped his opposition to oil and natural gas drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Representative Bartlett says high oil prices have prompted his change of heart, and that revenue from drilling leases would generate “badly needed funds for alternative and renewable energy programs.”
If a congressperson is looking for some “badly needed” revenue, it seems to me the answer is right under their nose.
Maybe they should examine the spending on wasteful pet projects known as earmarks, or pork, that many members attach to bills to appease their local voters? Or the ongoing joke, and an expensive one at that, that the Capitol Visitor Center has been? Or the billions of dollars under the direction of the Coalition Provisional Authority in the first years of the Iraq war that simply vanished? Or how about the over half a billion dollars that’s been spent broadcasting TV Marti to Cuba despite a miniscule audience?
When it comes to government accounting, and a representative on the Hill talking about “money in the bank,” the taxpayer in me cringes. There is a major disconnect between accountability and Congress’ fuzzy math.
Is this the best idea our government representatives can come up with when it comes to generating revenue for energy programs?
Francis Smith, Special Publications Assistant Editor
Sphere: Related ContentSo, do u txt wen ur drivng?
May 22, 2008
I do, I’ll admit it. And there’s really no good reason except that I’m bored in the car. My grandmother would kill me.
I’m no road safety expert, but I think it’s safe to say that it’s bad to drive without looking at the road. Apparently people around here don’t care. According to WTOP in Washington, Maryland and Virginia are ranked fourth and sixth in the country when it comes to the number of people who admit to taking their thumbs off the wheel.
In Maryland, 36 percent of people say they text and drive. It’s slightly less common in Virginia, where 35.6 percent own up to it.
WTOP said the stats come from Vlingo, a company that makes voice recognition technology for phones. The company says its product can substitute for text messaging, so they may have a dog in the fight.
South Carolina takes the top spot at 40 percent. The lowest number was in Arizona (14 percent). At first, that surprised me, given the straight desert roads and the wide open spaces. Then again, they have winding mountain roads, too. They also may not have cell service everywhere in rural states. Vermont (20 percent) was the third-lowest. I used to live there and I couldn’t text and drive because there were no cell towers outside of town.
Some lawmakers in Maryland tried to ban texting while driving during this year’s legislative session, but the effort fell short because others in the General Assembly wanted an outright ban on cell phone use and they couldn’t find a compromise. Neither proposal made it through, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see these topics again next year.
ANDY ROSEN, Business Writer
Sphere: Related ContentDennis Quaid testifies about limits on lawsuits
May 14, 2008
Actor Dennis Quaid was in Congress today, testifying about the medical mistake that caused his newborn twins to get 1,000 times the normal dose of the blood thinner Heparin.
While the mix-up occurred in the hospital, Quaid and his wife say Heparin’s maker, Baxter Healthcare Corp., must answer for the way it packaged the dose and the megadose.
The two labels were so similar, the Quaids claim, that Baxter had warned hospitals about it and submitted changes to the FDA, but didn’t bother to recall containers that were already out there. Baxter says it should be immune from suit because the FDA approved the original labels.
That puts the case at the crossroads of the debate over federal pre-emption of consumer lawsuits, now underway in Congress and coming to the Supreme Court later this year in a case from Vermont.
According to the Associated Press:
Lawsuit limits have been included in 51 rules proposed or adopted since 2005 by agency bureaucrats governing just about everything Americans use: drugs, cars, railroads, medical devices and food.
Decried by consumer advocates and embraced by industry, the agencies’ use of the government’s rule-making authority represents the administration’s final act in a long-standing drive to shield companies from lawsuits.
“Like many Americans, I believed that a big problem in our country was frivolous lawsuits,” Quaid testified. “But now I know that the courts are often the only path to justice.” He added that pre-emption “will basically make us uninformed and uncompensated lab rats.”
What’s your take — do you agree with the consumer advocates, or do you think there needs to be a limit?
JACKIE SAUTER, Web Editor
Sphere: Related Content-
Business
Business posts- UnderArmour to supply apparel for SEC
- The next Great Depression: How ya like them apples?
- It’s all for the kids
- Will CEG shareholders support EDF’s bid?
- Battle of the Beltway
- Any price is too high if you’re broke
- Maryland: 10th-fastest internet speeds in nation
- Where the deals are
- Phelps named Sportsman of the Year
- Can SUV sales make a comeback?
Law
Law posts- Tis’ the season for layoffs
- A case of mistaken identity
- Beware of the blogging juror
- Inmate sought to intervene in Wells Fargo suit
- What’s behind that law firm’s headcount?
- Law blog round-up
- This week in Maryland Lawyer
- A history of football in Baltimore, courtesy of a lawsuit
- Baltimore crime stuck at 12th-worst in U.S.
- First a mongrel Mercedes, now a botched Bentley
Recent Posts
- Tis’ the season for layoffs
- UnderArmour to supply apparel for SEC
- The next Great Depression: How ya like them apples?
- A case of mistaken identity
- It’s all for the kids
Recent Comments
- Jacki Pearlman: Unfortunately, the game will not live up to it’s hype. I am a diehard Redskins fan after being...
- Isolde: Anybody remember GreedyAssociates.com? That’s basically a forum for ads and political weirdos now. Why?...
- Liz Farmer: Thanks for chiming in guys. Ed, you are exactly right. I did not include this in my original post but...
- Rick Rigini: Did you ever read the children’s book Norman the Doorman?
- Ed Waters Jr.: In many articles, it seems the writers tend to overlook the fact that some people need an SUV (or...
On Commenting
We ask that our readers follow a few guidelines, noted below.Please do not post any personal attacks, profanity, spam or other advertisements — they will be removed. Also, please post using only one name or pseudonym, as this consistency helps establish a sense of community. We will delete posts if they are signed with different names but originate from the same IP or email address. And if you’re going to comment using a proper name, please make it your own. Deliberate misrepresentations will be removed.