Gun Grabbers Tell Us Not To Freak Out About Requirements To Lock Up Guns

See, now, this is exactly the kind of thing which makes 2nd Amendment supporters refuse to even consider passing any laws on firearms, which could even help restrict criminals from getting firearms, because we know that what gun grabbers really want is to kill off private ownership of firearms for law abiding citizens using the death by a 1,000 papercuts method. I’ve mentioned this 10 days ago, and here we have them telling us what they really want to do

The Next Big Gun Controversy Is Forcing People to Lock Them Up
Naturally, gun owners are freaking out.

Well, yeah, naturally, because this affects law abiding gun owners 99% of the time, not criminals

Two weeks before Christmas in 2012, a 22-year-old masked man armed with a stolen assault-style rifle went on a shooting rampage in a crowded shopping mall in Happy Valley, Oregon, just outside Portland, thrusting holiday shoppers into a maelstrom. By the time the bullets stopped flying, three people, including the gunman, had been fatally shot, and a 15-year-old girl was wounded.

Now family members of the deceased victims are pushing for a ballot measure that would make Oregon one of the few states in the nation to mandate that gun owners lock up their firearms. They contend that such a law could have thwarted the afternoon massacre at the Clackamas Town Center mall.

The measure that Clackamas survivors are now pushing would enact a so-called safe-storage law, under which gun owners would have to lock up firearms not under their direct control. The measure would also require anyone whose guns are lost or stolen to report the incident to law enforcement within 24 hours.

Violations of either provision could result in fines—reaching up to $2,000 if a child picked up the firearm—and expose gun owners to civil liability if their purloined weapons are used to injure someone within five years.

Actually, the law is rather vague on locking up firearms not under direct control: it almost looks as if all firearms have to be locked up with some sort of trigger lock at all times, including when carrying. And, notice, fines on those who have had their property stolen. We do not penalize people who have had other property stolen, such as motor vehicles, that are used to hurt other people. This is all about trying to scare citizens into not exercising their Constitutional rights.

“There’s no appetite by some of the legislative leadership to bring gun bills forward unless the gun-violence prevention advocates make it so difficult for them they can’t ignore it,” said Kemp, himself a gun owner who, along with Yuille, helped found the group Gun Owners for Responsible Ownership.

“They’ve had 20 or 30 years to fix this stuff, and they’ve chosen not to do a damned thing.”

First, the name of the group sounds just like something the Left would come up with as a distraction from their real agenda. Second, every time we try to pass harsher penalties on actual criminals, Liberals freak out and threaten to sue, they claim raaaaacism, you know the playbook.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Gun Grabbers Tell Us Not To Freak Out About Requirements To Lock Up Guns”

  1. Dana says:

    When the burglars break in, there’s nothing quite like having to get your weapons out of the safe and undoing the trigger locks . . . .

  2. Jeffery says:

    Such a law would be largely unenforceable. In addition, one assumes your firearm for protection would be “under your direct control” and not locked in a gun safe.

    On the other hand, if your toddler pulls your loaded 9mm out of the drawer and shoots his little sister, maybe you should be held liable. If a burglar pulls your AR-15 out of the closet while you’re out, maybe you should be held liable.

  3. There are NO reasonable gun control laws. These are all incremental approaches to the goal of disarming the serfs (everyone except the very wealthy and government elites). And they are all pushed by the usual suspects, which tells you that it will never be enough. All of these ideas have been pushed before as part of the incremental plan for decades. There is no reason for anyone who has been paying attention to give these people any credibility nor any cooperation. There is no middle ground. There is no reasonable compromise between rational people with differing points of view. You either believe that most people inherently deserve liberty, or you believe most people should be controlled by a small handful of politically connected people, “for their own good”. This is true of Gun control, Health care, smoking, energy use, and everything else. And it’s always the same political groups on the same side of all these things. The history of gun control in America didn’t start last year. It’s over a hundred years old and the older you are, the more of it you can personally remember.

    Notice that the left never recommends disarming the police, the military or private security guards. So it’s not about total disarmament. Just disarming the serfs.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8092 access attempts in the last 7 days.