What I have been suggesting for a long time - good gun storage reduces gun mortality and morbidity. Even if this only really applies to reducing morbidity and mortality for children then it will be worthwhile. But as suggested by the video it may well go a long long way to keeping guns out of the hands of “bad guys” by reducing theft
related thread: The real reason behind the gun control change in Virginia It explains what's really behind this push, changing demographics, as the suburbs of Washington D.C. expand outwards across the state border into Virginia and lots of people from around the New York area continue to move south.
If Virginia really wanted to "compromise", what they should have done is separated off the northern counties near D.C. (with all this sprawling suburban growth) and have a separate state law for them. (This would be kind of similar to what Pennsylvania does, they have separate state gun laws that apply to the counties surrounding Philadelphia) That way everyone can be happy.
You should really try watching the video, when that is the basis for an OP, before offering an opinion. How does this law make anyone unhappy? It does not require anything, of anybody. All it does, is allows those who purchase gun safes, lockboxes, and cases, to take a deduction, on their state taxes, of up to $300.
Well I'm always in support of people getting their money back. And this is just say you could write off your taxes up to $300 you spend on safety or security devices. Essentially it's a $300 rebate on a safe so not bad. But the guy in the video seems a little straight he drives his kids to school and lets them out of the car and praise they don't get killed in school they're more likely to get killed in the car why did he say a prayer before he leaves it's just the amount of death in traffic is acceptable. Good job on this one though. I could get behind tax incentives. He talks about assault weapons which aren't a thing and then high capacity magazines which aren't a thing either. He also quoted that very dishonest CDC thing. The guy is talking about mass shooting that doesn't have anything to do with people buying guns I don't know why they can't get this through their skulls.
Vehicles are regulated (air bags, seat belts, child seats, crash test, crumble zones etc..), the roads are regulated (licence system, crossings, speed, road markings, street lamps, guard rails etc..). So especially around school areas, speed is controlled further, and you can't pass a school bus, I believe American school buses have a flashing light system. So all this road regulation reduces risk, incidents, and injury. Same with guns. If you own a gun, secure it in a cabinet at home, secure the shells/bullets in a separate locked case. Not only very easy to do, but a very responsible thing to do, especially with kids in the house. Anyone allowing unsecured guns lying around their house, and those believing they need their gun to shoot others in the name of self defence, both groups are unsuitable to own and be near guns.
You completely fail to understand the primary reason to own guns for most. And your opinion on who and who is not suitable is simply your opinion.
no they're not the roadways are regulated. That is a public place where everyone uses their car together. There have to be regulations. This also applies to guns hunting on public land you have to get Hunter safety and you have to follow regulations. That's not on the gun those are a few regulations you have to abide with your gun. and we do that for gun ownership too. that's a homeowner's business the government does not invited into your house to make sure you're doing all this stuff so making such a long would be profoundly stupid. this is just the de facto gun control. If I can't keep my gun handy and usable then it can't be used for self-defense. I can't tell the murderer to hang on while I unlock my cabinet take my gun out and then unlock my ammo cabinet and take the ammo out to then fire on someone. Your ideas are not practical, they're also impossible to enforce. Any attempt to do that sort of thing will get slapped down by the supreme Court as it should as it's a violation of the second amendment.
You might not think that your life or the life of your loved ones is worth defending with the best tool available but that doesn't mean that everyone else shares your opinion
You just confirmed the problem, those that deem themselves responsible gun owners are willing to shoot others. That's the wrong mentality of a safe gun owner. That type of person wouldn't get a licence in the UK, hence why we enjoy gun use with low incident stats.
And yet the NRA a few years back brought lawsuits against paediatricians to stop them from asking parents if there was a gun In the house. Fortunately a little thing called the first amendment finally got in the way https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-my-toddlers-check-up-because-this-is-america
When debating guns, Americans always default to self defence. When debating abortions, pro abortionists default to rape. Rape accounts for less than 1% of abortions. Posters here can never come up with an instance when they felt their gun saved them, and when the odd one comes up, we all know it's an exaggeration or lie.
well yeah if I have to in order to save my life or the life of someone I love that's the point of self-defense. No it isn't. That's the correct mentality for a gun owner that owns a gun for self-defense at least. What would you know about it? in the US you don't need a license here it is a right that cannot be licensed and you got attempt to require a license will be stopped down by the supreme Court. I don't need a license to speak freely I don't need a license to join a religion I don't need a license to be secure in my person papers and effects we have a constitution here. And I don't worry about gun incidents because first and foremost I'm not suicidal so that reduces my risk to gun incidents by over half, taking them I didn't involved in any criminal enterprises so that drops my risk of gun incidences to a statistical zero.
Is it the “best tool available”? Quite frankly the best tool available is the grey matter between your eyes. Defensive Gun Use is RARE https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-l...un-use-crime-victims-conjunctive-analysis-its
Do you need a licence to drive a car? What does a vehicle licence do to you, does it stop you driving?
yeah that's the whole point. So you don't know what the second amendment says. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It says right in the amendment security of a free state. The whole point of any weapon throughout all of history is to defend yourself against other people. That's the reason the concept of a weapon exists I don't know why you're in denial of this.
no. You need a license to drive one on the roadway. There's no such thing as a vehicle license in the US. You need a driver's license but only to drive on the roadway. So a vehicle license is nothing. Only driver's license does is permit me to operate a vehicle on the roadway. Again a roadway needs to be regulated because it's where everyone else operates their vehicle and again there's an equivalent to that with regards to using your firearms you need hunter safety to hunt on public land. I don't need a license to defend my life.
Everyone on the planet knows America's 2nd Amendment. We all know who's a vegan, because both groups bleat on about it. We're not interested in the 2nd, pro 2nd Amenders are because they default to it to try and get out of talking common sense We all know what gun common sense is. We all know common sense is to lock them up when not in use. We all know guns walking around in public areas is not safe. We all know it's not common sense to let any Tom Dick Harry to have a gun. But a pro gunner will never ever admit to gun common sense, hence they play the, "2nd Amendment", card.
So do you object to going through a procedure to obtain a driving licence (driving lessons, no road violations, testing)? So a roadway needs regulated because everyone operates their vehicles there? Do you think high streets, schools, shops, parks, public places should be regulated for safety because people operate their lives there? If you want to shoot on your private property, or a gun range, or when hunting deer etc.. in an authorised area, then knock your pan in. But in public areas where everyone is, how important is their safety? Should people walk around in those public areas with baseball bats, knuckle dusters, knives, guns, hand grenades?
this will be interesting. why is this common sense explain? if this is common sense then it would be very easy for you to explain why. So everyone that disagrees with you is just an evil moron? You talked about needing a license. We bring up the second amendment because that is our license.
