View Single Post
Old 12-30-2012, 03:51 PM   #290600
Registered User
mkodama's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 33,142
Originally Posted by Devious21 View Post
I'm not going to sleep with my gun on me but if it's next to me on my dresser that's more than adequate to be combat effective. If it's locked in a safe, that's another story.

My point was that there is already a law on the books for that, which provides little more than an additional fee. It can be ignored just as your proposed law can be ignored. At the end of the day, it will add additional cost for a "certified safe" that will just be tacked on to the fee and then people will go about business as usual.

The last 2 shootings - in one case the guns were taken because they were left on a table out of the safe. The 2nd because they were stolen from a gun store with plenty of safes but they were out on display. I don't think the "Capacity" to store a gun is an issue.

You also have to take into account what the law will realistically accomplish. My analogy to the child locks was that there is a law there to encourage(not enforce) behavior which can be immediately ignored and just taxes people to pay for the lock. So requiring proof of purchase of a safe can just be seen as a $50 tax on the ability to purchase weapons. Requiring something to be un-theftable is a pretty tall order and it won't actually change anything.

People are going to have to accept that in shootings where people intend to die afterwards, are going to happen. Laws will not stop those people. Our only hope is to improve society as a whole so people like that don't fall through the cracks to the point where they're going on suicidal killing sprees. Positive nationwide change and education isn't our strong point though, so a law on paper makes people feel better, despite it's effectiveness.
Ugh... all good points. This gun law stuff is hard.

mkodama is offline   Reply With Quote