This legislation is discriminatory since many disabled shooters, weak shooters, and individuals with small hands (most often women) are not able to safely get a grip on and fire larger handguns. Size and weight are the primary factors. Weak arms and hands cannot accommodate larger framed and thus heavier guns.

The problem with large guns for small hands is often the reach distance to the trigger. Although a larger custom grip can be put on a smaller gun, a smaller grip cannot be put on a larger framed gun. Small handed shooters must compromise the proper grip on the firearm by moving the finger forward onto the trigger for proper leverage, thus moving the thumb behind the backstrap, rather than the web of the hand behind the backstrap.

This results in a loss of control and a necessary repositioning of the hand between shots. This makes the shot inaccurate, and the shooting less safe. It also causes recoil to be directed into the joint of the thumb, resulting in pain for the shooter. This observation, common sense to shooters, is also verified in a report by the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Office of Special Training, Firearms Division: Weapon Suitability: Ergonomics In Semi-Automatic Pistol Selection. Note: The members of the LA City Council's Public Safety Committee have been given copies of this report.

The small women, men, and disabled people that this measure discriminates against most are also most often the victims of violent crime since they are less likely to be able to resist their attacker physically. (Three out of four women will fall victim to violent crime sometime in their lives.) In the
case of people with disabilities, they are often not able to flee from a violent situation.

The small hands issue was not studied by the Task Force recommending this ordinance, nor addressed in its report. It would seem obvious that the Committee should get a supplemental report from the Task Force on this important issue.

Does the impact on disabled shooters raise Americans with Disabilities Act problems? Why not let the City Attorney report on whether the ADA would prohibit this?

California State Law (Penal Code section 12026) allows people to carry concealed firearms at their homes and places of business without a concealed firearms permit. That is a legitimate market for these firearms, yet it is not acknowledged by the Task Force.

The proposed ordnance says: "No dealer or other person shall sell, lend, give, transfer ownership of, or otherwise transfer to any other person any ultra compact handgun." 55.16 (c). Although that section does not "when the purchaser or transferee is" law enforcement The way the law is written it would prohibit anyone from loaning a UCH to a friend at the range, even momentarily. For that matter, although it allows dealers to sell to police officers, the exemption for police officers does NOT allow them to sell or loan a UCH to someone else. So if you, or a police officer, want to teach your significant other," or anyone else, how to shoot safely at the range, loaning a UCH to them for that purpose is a crime.

People who use guns to defend themselves are less likely to be attacked or injured than people who use other methods of protection or do not defend themselves. (Kleck, analysis of National Crime Victimization Surveys, Targeting Guns, 1997)

Handguns are used for protection against criminals nearly two million times per year, up to five times more often than to commit crimes. (Kleck, "The Frequency of Defensive Gun Use," in Kates and Kleck, The Great American Gun Debate, S.F.: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1997.)

The act of banning particular types of firearms is largely futile since criminals will simply adopt another type of firearm to use in crime. This is called the "substitution effect."

Although the legislation purports to be aimed at reducing gang violence, handguns that slightly exceed the ban limitations are just as easily concealable as those being banned. This is particularly true with baggy pants worn by gang members.

California has over 700 gun laws (more than any other state) which has not served to prevent a myriad of crimes. LA City has more gun control laws than any other city, yet it is one of the few cities with a rising violent crime rate. Why not adopt Project Exile, or other projects that are working in other cities?

Councilmember Feuer is clearly bringing this issue to the forefront at this time in order to gain attention as he is running for City Attorney and needs election/campaign publicity. When he had the chance to make a real difference in reducing crime, Feuer chose not to address the real problems,
which include gangs, illegal drugs, schools, mass transit, and a dysfunctional LAPD.

Chief Parks, Women Against Gun Violence, and the LA County Bar Association have already stated publicly that the ultimate goal of anti-gun legislation is a total handgun ban.