General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (onehandle) on Mon Jun 27, 2016, 12:44 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)
Waldorf
(654 posts)
hack89
(39,181 posts)
hunter
(40,620 posts)Simple is best.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Now we live a thousand miles apart.
I'm not welcome at your house?
hunter
(40,620 posts)Remember my mom? The "nice" aunt who took away your gun?
Sorry about your fingers, man. And your gun.
And you were lucky. Great grandma might have taken your entire hand.
That's maybe why grandma's friend had one hand missing.
The story he told about fishing with dynamite could have been a lie.
I never played with guns. I was more into rockets and explosives.
Maybe that's how I inherited Spot.
Or perhaps Spot inherited me.
Sometimes I find partially digested guns in his poop.
I never ask him where he's been.
Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)or otherwise safeguarded. How hard is that?? Also, TEACH YOUR CHILDREN GUN SAFETY!!! IT'S UP TO YOU!! Don't rely on others to do it for you. Period.
If you *THINK* that you are a "responsible gun owner", be responsible enough to teach your children that they are NOT play toys, that they can seriously hurt, or kill, themselves or an innocent bystander, and what to do in case they happen to come across a weapon that is laying out in the open, whether it's at your house, a friend's house, in a park, schoolyard, etc. GO GET AN ADULT, DO NOT TOUCH IT... Teach them young, even if you DON'T own guns, so it takes away their 'natural curiosity'.
Peace,
Ghost
Crunchy Frog
(28,237 posts)Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)If you *THINK* that you are a "responsible gun owner", be responsible enough to teach your children that they are NOT play toys, that they can seriously hurt, or kill, themselves or an innocent bystander, and what to do in case they happen to come across a weapon that is laying out in the open, whether it's at your house, a friend's house, in a park, schoolyard, etc. GO GET AN ADULT, DO NOT TOUCH IT... Teach them young, even if you DON'T own guns, so it takes away their 'natural curiosity'.
"Eddie Eagle" has no place in this conversation, since it goes against what I said about teaching them yourselves and not relying on others to do it. It doesn't matter if Barney the Purple Dinosaur, or the President for that matter, comes into a classroom for an hour to talk to kids. They are going to be paying more attention to the 'celebrity' status than to the actual message.
I grew up in a house with guns, got my first .22 rifle, that was handed down from my grandfather to my father, when I was 7, and the words of my father stuck in my head a lot deeper than anything anyone else could have said: "This is YOURS now, but you are NOT to even TOUCH it without me, your Mother or your Uncle around. *IF* I even *think* that you have, or hear that you have, I will whip your ass and the gun will be in the bottom of a canal, and you will never touch another one until you are grown up and out of my house on your own". THAT carried more weight with me than ANYTHING ANYONE ELSE could have said because I still remember it, word for word, 46 years later. We didn't have an "Eddie Eagle" back in 1970, either.
We used to go target shooting, as a family, almost every weekend and I had firearms safety drilled into my head from a very young, impressionable age. PARENTS need to spend the time teaching their kids because they spend a LOT more time with them than some guy in a costume at a school does. MY kids grew up in a house with guns, too. They were taught the same lessons that I was as a child. Although purely anecdotal, there's an example of 4 GENERATIONS of gun owners who never had a negligent discharge or "accidental" shooting.
Peace,
Ghost
adigal
(7,581 posts)Like they'd even be able to hold the gun upright with all of the adrenaline rushing through their body.
They train cops for 6 months to a year for a reason. To learn to shoot/react with huge amounts of adrenaline rushing through their bloodstream. People are such tough posers, "I'd shoot that intruder right between the eyes." Sure, you would! More likely you'd shoot your own foot. Or here's another funny one - "I'd shoot to injure only," Hahahah! Dolts.
Poor baby. RIP.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)I highly doubt that. That might be the entire training course. In the military I received about 40 hours of weapons training.
Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)firearms certifications"....
Peace,
Ghost
COLGATE4
(14,886 posts)tell me, 'when you pull your gun on a 'bad guy' you'd better be prepared for him to take it and stick it up your ass'. Whole lot of truth in that.
...my son's CC instructor said, 'if you plan on carrying a gun have at least a million dollar insurance policy, expect to hire an attorney and only carry if you are prepared to kill someone.' The course was very enlightening for the twenty two year old. He keeps his guns locked in a gun safe now. Shoots at a range or at his buddies target.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)"If you ever pull a piece on another human being you had damned well better intend to fire and take that person's life without hesitation."
Firearms are serious tools requiring serious thought and contemplation before they are ever used for their primary purpose. If you think you would have even a moment of hesitation prior to squeezing off a round if you were to aim that piece at another human being, you would be better off not owning that piece in the first place.
COLGATE4
(14,886 posts)Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)Except for the ones who actually do every day of the year in self defense, or DGUs (Defensive Gun Uses), and range in ages from pre-teens to in their 80's. Not *everyone* gets so scared that they are shaking, nor does *everyone* get "adrenaline rushing through their body". *Some* people can remain cool, calm, collected and even 'methodical' in what is normally a stressful situation. Don't forget all of the former/retired Military members and LEOs out here, or even the "regular man/woman" who would do ANYTHING they HAD to do just to protect their family from imminent danger....
That "reason" being so that they can pass their 'firearms proficiency test' each year to keep qualified. I have a cousin who just retired last year, after 20 years on the force, who never drew his weapon in the line of duty and only used it once a year to practice for a week before the 'proficiency tests' to keep his certification. I also have a 23 year old nephew who came out of the Military and went straight into Law Enforcement. He's a Deputy Sheriff in a major City/County in Georgia, and was recently called back in during an "active shooter" situation a couple of months ago. He's only been there for about 6 or 7 months, but is already known by name in the area he patrols. He made a major meth bust in his patrol area, which is way out in the country, and all of the dealers/cooks know him. I worry about him sometimes, but after talking with him a few weeks ago when he came to visit, I know that he keeps very alert to his surroundings, and nobody is just going to sneak up on him and do him in. He changes his route/routine daily, and someone would have to lay in wait for a long time to try to pick him off like a sniper.
Yeah, it's easy to be a keyboard commando, internet toughguy or whatever you WANT to be online, but there are still those of us who have the capability to do it. My daughter was sexually assaulted back in 2010 by someone she knew, and he told her that if she went to the law and he went to jail, he would burn our house down, with us in it, when he got out. He got sentenced to 6 years in prison, and was just released June 15th. He continued to make those threats while in prison... part of the reason he was denied parole twice and did his full stretch. I have 3 pitbulls that let me know if someone is near my house, and I can promise you one thing: If they start barking in the middle of the night and I see someone in my yard carrying gas cans, they WILL get dropped with no questions asked. My dogs DO NOT bark at other animals, or people they know. They actually KNOW the sounds of familiar vehicles, too. They don't bark when I pull in, or at my daughter, my parents, my sister or another friend that visits regularly. They don't bark at the neighbors or their vehicles, either.... but let a stranger walk up, or drive up, and they go nuts! They just chased someone down through my woods the other night. We couldn't see who it was, but we could hear them running, and yelling, as they were getting away. No way in hell was I going to shoot blindly into the woods in the dark, either... I could have hit one of my dogs!
Agreed 100%! Babies don't get to choose their parents, and this poor soul really got dealt a bad hand, stuck with stupid, irresponsible parents...
Peace,
Ghost
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 25, 2016, 12:02 AM - Edit history (1)
Free Gun locks
http://www.projectchildsafe.org/safety/get-a-safety-kit
ileus
(15,396 posts)A firearm can't save lives in the wrong hands.
hunter
(40,620 posts)Once the guns come out everything is FUBAR.
Who lives, who dies, is too damned random.
This fucking "self defense" fantasy needs to be shut down.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)People use firearms every single day to protect themselves or their property.
The fact that you think that is some kind of fantasy says way more about you than it does about any gun owner.
Jerry442
(1,265 posts)Settle the question once and for all. Oh, right, they can't. Wonder who would block such a thing. And why.
ManiacJoe
(10,138 posts)Jerry442
(1,265 posts)ManiacJoe
(10,138 posts)they are required to start from a neutral position.
They are prevented from promoting gun control.
Jerry442
(1,265 posts)...I am incapable of explaining it to you. Anyone else out there who wants to try, feel free.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)Research that presupposes a desired outcome and tailors its method toward achieving that outcome is bad research. It isn't research at all, actually. It's advocacy. If you want to do advocacy, do it on a private or NGO dime.
Jerry442
(1,265 posts)Say, how can I be sure you're not a gun-grabber posing as an over the top gun advocate to advance the agenda of confiscation?
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)Say, how can I be sure you're not a gun-grabber posing as an over the top gun advocate to advance the agenda of confiscation?
I'm not doing research. Research needs to start with a neutral stance. Starting with an advocacy position taints the methodology and the result.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)It's not that the "ban" was "lifted." As per the body of the article, the ban was "self-imposed" and they were "ordered" by the President to resume doing research. And if the "CDC still isn't researching gun violence," where did this come from?
http://dhss.delaware.gov/dhss/dms/files/cdcgunviolencereport10315.pdf
Disliking results is not the same as "blocking".
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)He was found innocent by a jury of his peers. Acquitted of all six charges - including manslaughter.
Sorry you think justice should be meted out by mob rule or keyboard warriors on the Internet.
Guess Art3Sec2 of the Constitution can be repealed - Anonymous internet person Hoyt will determine guilt now.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Playing cowboy, intimidating someone unarmed, and then having to lie their way out of it claiming they feared for their lives.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #95)
Post removed
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Because it doesn't. You give that fat fuck more airtime than he gets anywhere else. You could be his publicist.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)shooting unarmed kid. Zman is just the best example of "law-abiding" gunners, supposed Defensive Gun Use, and similar gunner BS.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)jack_krass
(1,009 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)He's uses the cute nickname he gave him and posts his picture more than all the broadcast and cable networks combined.
I actually think he actively searches for news about the fat fuck, and spends his time looking for pictures of him too.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)The jury said not guilty. That's how the law works.
You weren't on the jury, and I have a feeling that you have no interest in reviewing the facts of the case, just running your trap on the Internet.
Again, it seems your form of "justice" comes from mob rule, informed and fueled by keyboard warriors on the Internet passing around false stories and versions of events that have no credence.
I don't support Zimmerman. He probably should be in jail, but I wasn't on the jury.
Waldorf
(654 posts)to turn out. If you went by facts instead of emotion you could see which way the wind was blowing.
adigal
(7,581 posts)Sorry. Most people wouldn't even be able to shoot straight in an intruder situation. The world isn't really like the teevee. If you go and research why cops get such a long training, it's so they can react coolly when the inevitable adrenaline rush comes, can be steady instead of shaking. And they still shake - my ex-cop husband says they just shake a little less. Without that training, the vast majority of us would barely be able to hold our arm steady, nevertheless shoot straight.
ileus
(15,396 posts)you can either curl up and wait to die or try and fight back. It's the chance I'll take (and my CHP enabled DW) , better fake safe than dead.
Do you suggest the same plan for rape victims?
Demit
(11,238 posts)
When I was 16 I was home alone when a young man ( that I now being older and more knowledgeable recognize as suffering from schizophrenia) broke in to my house. I was a few rooms away from the door he entered and saw him down the hall come in crouching down and turning off the lights in that mudroom. I backed in to my parents room and got a .357 I knew where it was. (I'll say here I had been around firearms my whole life, knew how to properly handle a handgun, use hunters safety training etc). As I came out of there bedroom he came around the corner, I held the pistol on him and told him not to move. I called 911 with my left hand, we had corded phones then, this was a dining room open to the kitchen, and he was bouncing, screaming, talking gibberish that I was an imp from hell.
Long story short, police got there and got him in the patrol car.
That was 32 years ago.
I can not tell you how glad I am that I didn't kill him.
I've thought about it a lot.
I will tell you something. There was one point when I was on the phone that he sort of walked around a circle keeping his distance to the kitchen and was sort of reaching behind him, facing me, to the kitchen counter and I knew he was trying ringer a bottle or knife or something and I flat out yelled that I was going to kill him if he reached anymore and I completely meant it. This will sound weird, but you have to know my mom. Honestly the time not thing that kept me from shooting him until head was I was afraid of my mom if I shot this guy in her kitchen. I imagined blood and a hole in the wall and I knew I would never hear the end of it. That was my 16 year old thinking. I'm so glad as an adult that some thought so stupid got us through it. Because I pushed off shooting as long as I could because of that and they guy got enough reality to back it down. I know it must have flipped out the 911 operator, the cops got there fast.
Anyway, I don't know what my point is, other than I honestly don't think adrenaline would have made me miss. I was stone cold locked on to his forehead. But again, I am so, so happy I didn't kill that guy.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)I'm glad all parties came out alive and well.
To the OP (against whom I often argue regarding the 2nd Amendment), we agree about gun locks/safes. All of my firearms are locked.
-app
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)... that only cops train? Some people train more than cops.
What makes you think that everyone shakes in a stressful situation? Some do, some don't.
What makes you think that people can't shoot straight when they're shaking? We're talking about a two-handed combat stance (or even a long gun) at a distance of under seven yards (in most cases), shooting at a human-sized target. The hypothetical "trembling arm" might plague a competition shooter who is trying to hit a dime-sized bullseye one-handed at fifteen yards, but it's far less of a concern in a defensive situation. Shoot enough and you'll hit your target -- you do get more than one shot, even in states with arbitrary magazine-capacity limits.
Separation
(1,975 posts)I once heard some real good advice..they said to go out on your porch and fire some warning shots into the air. Thats pretty much what ive been doing ever since. Whenever the police roll up, I just tell them Im following the VP's advice. 
ManiacJoe
(10,138 posts)
Just reading posts
(688 posts)Waldorf
(654 posts)or visualization) it's not fantasy.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)If you see a weapon, don't touch, get an adult.
Please firearms owners, secure your weapons, it is your responsibility.
Jerry442
(1,265 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)as the program never tells the child to touch a weapon, get an adult. Too bad you are against that.
Jerry442
(1,265 posts)But it does show role model adults with guns. Imagine an anti-smoking program for kids that showed every adult with a butt in his/her mouth.
LongtimeAZDem
(4,516 posts)Evidence please.
Jerry442
(1,265 posts)But then you already convinced me there are a lot of things you're not aware of.
On edit: By the way that is the only Eddie video I looked at. What are the odds I'd find the rare armed adult segment?
LongtimeAZDem
(4,516 posts)You are right, of course.
No need for sarcasm, BTW; I hadn't seen it, so I asked.
Edited to add: That said, your smoking analogy is fallacious. An anti-smoking ad would say that no one should smoke; these materials teach children that guns are for adults.
The program teaches that if a child finds a gun they should Stop, Don't Touch, Run Away, and Tell a Grown-Up. The materials further instruct parents that it is their responsibility to ensure that guns are stored safely.
These are undeniably good instructions, but since they don't promote an anti-gun position, you trash them.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Crunchy Frog
(28,237 posts)Straw Man
(6,943 posts)... how many of the kids in that study actually did touch the gun. I may have missed it, but I don't recall it being mentioned. We do see four.
I'd also like to know how the teachers and parents dealt with the aftermath of the transgression. The teacher seemed far too calm and "Oh well." The message the kids would carry away is "Well, I guess messing around with the gun we found wasn't such a big deal after all."
"Eddie the Eagle" was never meant to be a substitute for safe storage. Safe storage is de rigeur, but what happens if kids find a gun on the street or in the woods? Wouldn't you want them to have been exposed to some training like this?
Waldorf
(654 posts)leeroysphitz
(10,462 posts)
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Just like no one who is "Pro Life" should be against birth control, so girls don't feel like they need them in the first place
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
forest444
(5,902 posts)never seem to have the same forethought when it comes to gun locks.
sarisataka
(22,565 posts)Bloomberg's Moms Demand Action and Everytown started their own lock distribution last year http://besmartforkids.org
Despite Bloomie's $50 million donation and over a year since the launch date, these "gun safety" groups have yet to distribute a single lock.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)More work needs to be done, but this cause of accidental death is a distant also-ran now, compared with several other causes. IIRC, over 40,000,000 trigger/breach locks have been distributed through Project Child Safe. I prefer a safe.
jtx
(68 posts)I am as pro-firearms rights as anyone, but personal responsibility goes with the right to own.
Guns should be not be left unsecured, and doubly so with children in the house.
If you think you need fast access, carry it in a holster, do not leave it laying around or in a purse, otherwise lock it in the safe.
LongtimeAZDem
(4,516 posts)hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)ManiacJoe
(10,138 posts)the sales tax is waived on gun safes. A step in the right direction.
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)hands of your kids. If you're paranoid enough to own a gun, then you should fund your paranoia, the US taxpayers shouldn't.
TeddyR
(2,493 posts)Should not fund/subsidize abortions either, right? Only things we agree with.
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)shouldn't it be? That's what civilized nations do for the public.
I don't see the equation here. Not agreeing on much!
Cheers!
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)shouldn't it be? That's what civilized nations do for the public.
I don't see the equation here. Not agreeing on much!
... shall we put you in the "gun death is not a public health issue" column, then?
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)I'm tired of appeasing the people clinging to their guns as if they're their genitalia at the cost of many thousands of lives every year.
In the very least, I heartily agree with the Senator who suggested that wanna-be gun owners be forced to endure every step and hardship a woman has to go through to obtain any almost decent form of birth control.
And for the record, yes, I place the importance, needs and welfare of the fully formed adult female life above that of a peanut sized, unwanted fetus.
So yeah, I say let's ban all guns except those used for agricultural purposes (in which case they are highly regulated, and deregulate all forms of birth control.
BTW I also want to decriminalize the possession and use of all recreational drugs, and deregulate a LOT of prescription medications.
That sounds really good and logical.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)You know -- the "guns as disease" model that drives a lot of gun control studies. If you subscribe to it, you should also favor public funding to address the issue, such as for providing safe storage to gun owners. Otherwise you're asking for an unfunded health mandate.
So two injustices are better than none? I don't follow your logic.
That sounds like a mirror image of the hypocrisy of those who argue for stricter regulation of abortion and against stricter regulation of guns: selective recognition of rights.
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)entire disease that is private gun ownership in the USA. Treat the disease, not the symptoms.
What injustice? How is effective birth control 'injustice'? A mass of fetal cells, a bunch of sperm, eggs, that didn't result in the fruition of a human life isn't subjected to any sort of injustice unless you believe that those fetal cells somehow are endowed with rights superior to the sentient woman in who's belly they're residing. By placing more priority on those cells in her womb and usurping that woman's free will, you reduce her to a second class citizen and are removing her rights. Most civilized people believe the sentient human is more important than the unwanted fetal cells. Usually the argument against birth control is rooted in the belief that women are dirty and unclean for having sex. And a vagina. And for not being male. Confusing, isn't it?
Birth control and guns have absolutely nothing in common with each other. Nothing, zilch, zero, no common ground. At all. Ever.
Guns do more harm than good, the statistics don't lie.
I support a ban all gun ownership in the USA except for agricultural purposes, just like the rest of the civilized countries have done. It's working pretty darned good for them in terms of dramatically reducing the numbers of gun related deaths and injuries, you can't argue with that.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)It isn't. Where did I ever say it was? Placing onerous restrictions on birth control is the injustice.
I'm amazed at the people who argue for gun control by citing such restrictions on abortion. Clearly they believe such restrictions are unjust and motivated simply by a desire to make abortion as difficult as possible. How can they then argue in good faith for similar restrictions on gun ownership?
I'm not the one who brought up abortion. You have me confused with someone else. However, you did say this:
If gun control is a public health issue, why should our tax dollars not also pay for remediation, such as gun locks?
What statistics are those? Do they account for defensive gun use? What figure do they cite for those?
What "civilized countries" have banned all gun ownership except for agricultural purposes?
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)I can tell you that paying for a gun safe is at least as good investment of gov't money as that.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)The law says I am required to have one.
Should be the same for my guns.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)oneshooter
(8,614 posts)Response to oneshooter (Reply #156)
cherokeeprogressive This message was self-deleted by its author.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)Didn't see the second line.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)The apology should be mine.
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)You sound like someone who doesn't read so well.
Squinch
(59,330 posts)
flvegan
(66,173 posts)I love gun locks because they get in the way of tragedy.
My dad had a .357 in a holster by his bed. He also had a cabinet full of military gear that I looked at but never touched. Why? He and mom told me not to. So I didn't.
Scruffy1
(3,530 posts)There are a few gun owners that are responsible and safety minded but handguns, in particular, are just too dangerous for the general public. Every time I drive somewhere I get convinced that there a lot of people who shouldn't operate a motor vehicle and we have actual laws (hardly enforced) that can penalize drivers and remove their licenses. Anyone can buy a gun without passing a written or operating test. The fact is that there are a lot of people who just can't follow instructions even if they were interested in doing so.
The same with assault rifles. They have no useful function, either. The current debate over gun control is a farce. All of wthese weapons need to go. There are no half way measures that will stop the carnage.
Just reading posts
(688 posts)at some point in the future, but not confiscation; existing guns will be grandfathered.
And handguns in general will never be banned.
The Wielding Truth
(11,432 posts)
I tip my hat the insanity of irrational gun nuts who will then go buy more guns.underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)France, Japan, the UK, etc. They're all doing very, very well without guns being toted in the streets by arrogant, paranoid and dangerous people.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)France, Japan, the UK, etc. They're all doing very, very well without guns being toted in the streets by arrogant, paranoid and dangerous people.
Canada:
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/09/20/experts-fear-the-start-of-a-new-quebec-biker-war
Australia:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/government-toughens-gun-laws-in-response-to-shootings-and-gangs-arms-race-20151027-gkk18x.html
France:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34827497
Japan:
http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1812808,00.html
UK:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/21/england-wales-homicides-rise-knife-gun-crime
There are plenty of "arrogant, paranoid, and dangerous people" in the world who are quite ready to do harm with or without a gun.
ManiacJoe
(10,138 posts)
LongtimeAZDem
(4,516 posts)As was pointed out in another thread, you can get a gun safe for $50 at Costco.
If anyone is harmed because you left a firearm unsecured, you should be prosecuted to the extent of the law, and those laws need to be extended in some states.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)It is more of a way to hide your firearms.
LongtimeAZDem
(4,516 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 25, 2016, 11:10 AM - Edit history (1)
Ready4Change
(6,736 posts)Even a simple, cheap storage locker could provide a barrier that can prevent tragedy. Sure it's nowhere near as good as a $2,000 safe, but its a far sight better than leaving a loaded firearm out on a table.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)And its advert says "Virtually impossible to pry open with hand tools" so it is absolutely completely by every definition and in every context a "gun safe".
You would hate it though because you can (gasp) see the gun.
http://www.costco.com/.product.100140526.html?cm_sp=RichRelevance-_-categorypageHorizontalTop-_-CategoryTopProducts&cm_vc=categorypageHorizontal
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)It is more of a way to hide your firearms.
A thief could have it open with a crowbar in 30 seconds, but it will stop a kid. Wasn't that the point of this thread?
These are a bit sturdier and not much more expensive:
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)It's nothing to a thief.
ReRe
(12,183 posts)... would be best all the way around. If we can't get guns registered, then require registration of all ammunition.
Just reading posts
(688 posts)ReRe
(12,183 posts)... of course. Happens every day with automobiles. If the procedure takes more than a day, give them a replacement gun of same style to use until they get the work done on their gun.
Just reading posts
(688 posts)It would take a lot more than a day, so that's half a billion "smart" guns you'll need to manufacture to "tide them over" while the work is done.
Presuming $500 to convert each gun, and $1000 for each "loaner", that's a cost of $750 billion dollars. There goes the budget....
ReRe
(12,183 posts)
Well, I guess we'll have to to recall All of em and keep em! and re-issue replacements with the thumbprint IDs. If you have antique guns that have been in the family since the Revolutionary War, those can be made inoperable if it's impossible to convert them. How's about that?
It's all so ridiculous, isn't it? What's more ridiculous than a dead 4 yr old? More ridiculous than a dead sister or brother, or a dead parent? Are you still laughing?
Read on.
phylny
(8,818 posts)I'm increasingly disgusted by the "But we CAN'T _______!!!!" crowd. I'm even more disgusted by the "haha" of it all. A four year old's brains were blown out of her head.
Dear Lord, find a fucking way to fix this slaughter, or get out of the way while sensible adults do it for you.
Just reading posts
(688 posts)implement, what do you expect?
Well, I guess we'll have to to recall All of em and keep em! and re-issue replacements with the thumbprint IDs
You get right on that. Keep us updated on your progress! 
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Just reading posts
(688 posts)Now what?
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Just reading posts
(688 posts)I'm simply not agreeing to your demand that I disarm.
TeddyR
(2,493 posts)And many do, so don't think ammo registration is an option. And how would that have prevented this tragedy?
Response to TeddyR (Reply #48)
ReRe This message was self-deleted by its author.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)Virtually anyone who does any serious shooting either reloads or knows someone who does and takes thier spent brass to them.
It is substantially cheaper than factory loaded ammo and the reloaded can fine tune their exact loads.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)TeddyR
(2,493 posts)Of course the individual who owns the gun should be held responsible. Probably every state has laws that permit prosecution in these types of circumstances and those laws should be enforced. However, I read an article a few months ago that said the gun owners often are not charged because the prosecutor believes the child's death is sufficient punishment.
As to how many people make their own ammo I have no idea. I just know that many do because it is less expensive.
Just reading posts
(688 posts)On a percentage basis, not that many....probably (just hazarding a guess) 5% or so.
However, that translates into millions of people....and a modest reloading setup can produce hundreds of rounds of ammunition in an afternoon. A more elaborate one, thousands. Here's a video of someone using a progressive press to reload a hundred rounds in less than 5 minutes.
Ready4Change
(6,736 posts)Some do it because it is cheaper than factory ammo, once you've invested in the equipment. (And yes, some people shoot enough that they can recover the cost of the equipment.)
Some do it so they can have ammunition that works better, for their specialized purpose, than factory ammo. For example, many people who compete in target shooting spend lots of time tuning that special combination of bullet weight/shape and powder type/amount to make their shooting just a hair more accurate.
And some people do it because they have a weapon that fires a type of ammunition factories no longer provide.
So yes, there are people out there who make their own.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)ManiacJoe
(10,138 posts)They especially don't work with dirty/bloody fingers or gloved hands.
aikoaiko
(34,214 posts)Giving a handgun lock box as a baby shower present is real action toward saving lives if one is concerned about unsecured handguns and accidental shootings by children. When parents are pregnant (especially the first time), there are often many bills, projects, and tasks in dire need of addressing before the baby arrives. Gun owners who had no need to lock up their self-defense handgun might delay getting a lock box because the baby won't even be able to roll over for a couple of months let alone get into the end table drawer. But they will soon and that's when tragedy happens.
Baby proofing items at showers are de rigueur and one should think of a gun lock boxes as one of many things gun owners will need.
There are many lock boxes out there that offer reasonably quick access to the firearm and still provide security from little fingers. Gun owners typically love gear. When I have done this in the past, the gift is appreciated and used.
For those who don't know about lock boxes there are many options from cheap to expensive. I generally prefer combinations to keyed access.
This is your classic mininum steel lock box with a combination lock. One gun and an extra mag just fit. It costs about $25.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
I use mine in my car. Its slim enough to fit in my glove box. I can retrieve it, open it, and rack the slide easily within 5 seconds. It is Snoopy approved.
[IMG]
[/IMG] [IMG]
[/IMG]
Something like this costs $99-$125. People like the buttons for quick access, but some don't like depending on electricity and the backup battery.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
Standard Mechanical Button Lock Box
For people who don't want to depend on electricity, get the mechanical push button lock box. They cost between $125-150.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
This is mine with my .357 in it. I didn't open this box for 3 years once when I kept it in a garage in the humid south and when I did it worked flawlessly. I like my AMSEC.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
For even quicker access you can purchase reliable lock boxes that use finger prints. This technology is great, but pricey.
The basic electronic button lock box with biometrics is about $350-400
[IMG]
[/IMG]
This slimmed down micro version is about $260-300
[IMG]
[/IMG]
If your soon-to-be-parents are into long guns for home defense, then I recommend something like this:
[IMG]
[/IMG]
I want one of these. Its intended to be used under the bed, but I think I will put mine on top of my dresser and put the flatscreen on top of it.
ManiacJoe
(10,138 posts)
baldguy
(36,649 posts)LongtimeAZDem
(4,516 posts)Just reading posts
(688 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)Oh, that's right ... she didn't.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)Oh, that's right ... she didn't.
Victims of drunk drivers didn't have a choice either. Yet we still let people drink.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)The solution to drunk driving would be to have more alcohol & more drinks.
Alcohol is regulated. Drunk driving is a crime. And allowing children access to alcohol is by definition child endangerment.
Can you say the same is true for gun owners? No you cannot.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)The solution to drunk driving would be to have more alcohol & more drinks.
Drunk driving is malum in se. There is absolutely no benefit in it; there is no such thing as "defensive intoxication." Gun ownership has positive aspects; there is such a thing as "defensive gun use."
Can you say the same is true for gun owners? No you cannot.
Yes, I absolutely can. Guns are regulated. Carrying while drunk is a crime. Giving alcohol to children is a crime; "allowing" them access through carelessness is not. No jurisdiction in the land requires people with children to lock up alcohol beverages.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Where they teach that guns have more rights than people.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)Where they teach that guns have more rights than people.
Also inaccurate and irrelevant.
Would you care to address the issue, or have we reached the ad hominem portion of the program?
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Since you're only here to promote their lies & propaganda.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)Since you're only here to promote their lies & propaganda.
This is the part where you abandon the discussion and impugn my motives and my character. When reasoned argument fails, invoke the evil NRA.
Once again: Would you care to address my response re gun regulation and alcohol regulation?
riversedge
(80,507 posts)Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)The 4 digit code or bilmwtic handgun bails are faster to get a handgun from if you need it fast, and they also provide some security against theft where a gun lock alone does not.
One thing I tell my students in the beginners handgun class if your budget to buy needs to include the gun, safe or vault, ammo and holster- don't just say "I have $700" and buy a $675 pistol and one box of rounds.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)They weigh 600-650lbs each empty and are bolted to the concrete floor and a filled concrete block wall. Any firearm that is not on my side in locked.
MH1
(19,145 posts)The fire department periodically gives out free smoke detectors. Maybe the police department could give out free gun locks. Hell, maybe the fire department should actually do that too, since so many people are scared of the police.
Obviously this wouldn't work for people who know they aren't legally allowed to have guns - they wouldn't walk into a cop shot and say hey, can I get one of those free locks for my Glock so my kid doesn't shoot himself? But for people who legally own them, maybe the ability to get a free lock would save a life or two.
Another idea would be to require that every gun sold has a matching lock with it.
sarisataka
(22,565 posts)The program that you described already exists
http://www.projectchildsafe.org
Use the locator to find a local police agency that is handing out locks
MH1
(19,145 posts)We sometimes hear about how to get free smoke alarms, or even free shredding events (to help people avoid identity theft). I can't recall ever hearing about a free gun lock giveaway, or even any ad on radio or tv telling folks they can get them for free at that website.
It's not for me, I am privileged to live in a place where I feel safe, and I don't think it's likely that I would keep a gun in the house. If I ever decided to own a gun I would certainly make sure I had a safe place to keep it (probably a gun safe). But I am thinking of people who feel, rightly or wrongly, they need or want to have a gun in their home, but at the same time feel they can't afford to get another accessory (i.e. the gun lock).
On the other hand, if the program exists, why don't they just team up with firearms dealers so that the dealers include the appropriate lock when they sell the gun? I think sometimes people intend to get one but don't get around to it. (I can't imagine why this would happen, it's not like I don't have a hundred thing around my house that need doing and I haven't gotten 'round to ...)
sarisataka
(22,565 posts)I have seen billboards or a flyer in a gun or sporting good store but not much else to advertise it. I believe the program and it just received a couple million dollar Grant from DOJ to help promote them and hand out more locks.
I have never seen any "gun safety" (control) organization reference this program in any of their literature. You would think preventing accidental child death would transcend ideology.
I believe all pistols now come with a lock included if you buy it new. I am not entirely sure that is universal but my observation is it is true. I do not know if new long guns also include locks.
sl8
(17,109 posts)From http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-laws/federal-law/consumer-child-safety/locking-devices/ :
In October 2005, as part of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, Congress passed and the President signed into law legislation making it unlawful for any licensed importer, manufacturer or dealer to sell or transfer any handgun unless the transferee is provided with a secure gun storage or safety device.1 A “secure gun storage or safety device” is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(34) as:
(A) a device that, when installed on a firearm, is designed to prevent the firearm from being operated without first deactivating the device;
(B) a device incorporated into the design of the firearm that is designed to prevent the operation of the firearm by anyone not having access to the device; or
(C) a safe, gun safe, gun case, lock box, or other device that is designed to be or can be used to store a firearm and that is designed to be unlocked only by means of a key, a combination, or other similar means.
The Act creates various exceptions, including transfers to other licensees, law enforcement officers, or federal, state or local agencies. The legislation does not apply to transfers by private sellers, and does not require that transferees use the device.
...
sarisataka
(22,565 posts)It looks like we could simply adjust that law to read-
secure gun storage or safety device must be used when the gun is not in use.
LongtimeAZDem
(4,516 posts)and have a lot of them to choose from.
I think the Project ChildSafe program is mostly valuable because it removes any possible excuse from getting one.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Can you imagine a gun safety ad getting air time during the Super Bowl? I can't, either. But I believe it's been tried. Hard to defy MSM Narratives.
Ready4Change
(6,736 posts)As a result, many manufacturers supply a lock with the firearm. Often the lock is a cost saving, cheaply built POC, but it's there.
Just reading posts
(688 posts)I also never have children in my house. Were I to do so (virtually no chance of that), I would change my setup.
GOLGO 13
(1,681 posts)They're not expensive.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)
raven mad
(4,940 posts)When my daughter was young, my guns not only had locks, the ammunition was locked in a separate safe, and the gun in yet another.
sir pball
(5,331 posts)The keypad at the storage unit gate, the lock on the storage unit door, and the safes inside the unit. It's practically impossible to even keep a bolt-action rifle up here in NYC so they're all in storage till I move somewhere I can at least have a deer/target gun.
But still, even at home, all locked up all the time. Bolted to a concrete floor.
hunter
(40,620 posts)Answer that!
They could try to jump me anywhere, at any time!
Hell, maybe even when I'm taking a shower!
Well?
Well?
.
.
.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)Our kids are grown up and long gone, but I do not want a loaded gun in my nightstand draw when I am home alone. Told my NRA husband that years ago. No, I do NOT want to know how to use it. Been there, done that for 40+ years. Give it up. Learn to COMPROMISE with your family members.
Tell me something gun owners. How would you feel if your gun at home was found and used by an intruder on your spouse, or your children? If they bring their own so be it, but why give them something they can use against you?
If a married couple can jump through hoops on the issue of guns, then Congress and American Public can too.
ManiacJoe
(10,138 posts)A gun "in the nightstand" is unsecured.
To be secured, the gun needs to be in a safe or otherwise locked or on your person.
