Abstract
This article examines an aspect of the debate described above. It begins by describing the federal firearms safety regulation that does exist and explaining the reason that there is relatively little federal firearms safety regulation. It will then examine one legislative proposal to subject firearms to federal safety regulation, the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act of 2003 (Firearms Safety Act) and compare it with the law that has been applied to seek to ensure the safety of other consumer products for over thirty years, the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA). That comparison will demonstrate that the genuine objective of the Firearms Safety Act has little to do with the safety of firearms in the hands of consumers, but is merely an excuse to hand virtually unlimited power over the firearms industry, and possibly some authority over firearms owners, to the Attorney General. Advocates of private firearms ownership are, therefore, quite justified to be suspicious of legislative proposals purporting to regulate the safety of firearms.
Recommended Citation
Dennis Wilson, What You Can't Have Won't Hurt You - The Real Safety Objective of the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act, 53 Clev. St. L. Rev. 225 (2005-2006)