Why not mandate trigger locks and locked gun cases?

People have been sentenced to jail for having someone drown in their pool. If you do not take required precautions you can be fined and have your pool filled in or taken away.

 

If baby daddy leave his loaded and cocked gat on the coffee table while get'n busy with baby mama back in the bedroom, and five year old baby brother, left totally unattended, wake up from his nap and shoot baby sister in her haid, I'm all for serious negligence/reckless endangerment charges being levied on both baby daddy and baby mama.

but what if responsible baby daddy keep his loaded but safely uncharged gat hidden away in the top of his closet and his 17 year old 'baby' steal it and take it to school to shoot up his classmates... then whatcha ya gonna do? should the baby daddy have some expectation that his heretofore normal son or daughter isn't a stone-cold killer? Is it appropriated for the almighty nanny state to compel, under threat of incarcertion, that baby daddy treat his near-adult children like they're toddlers?

What about people like me who live alone?

 

Unfortunately that leaves one at quite a disadvantage when t comes to home defense. You see the paroled thugs Jerry Brown let out of prison ten years early are not even supposed to have guns. But there he is, 3:30 in the morning and you hear the shattering of glass in your kitchen... "hey fella, can ya give me a minute before you come in here to pistol whip me and rape my wife? I need to get my gun out of the safe and disengage the trigger lock. Should only be a minute. Thaaaaaanks. Help yourself to some lemonade in the fridge while you're waiting."

You want to give a longer sentence to the homeowner in the scenario above than Jerry Brown does the thug who broke into your home.

 

Yeah I want every pool owner to be required to take safety courses, life guard lessons CPR...and I want no pool to be over 4 ft deep. No one needs a deep end. I also want the pool manufacturers to be held liable if anyone breaks in and steals a swim and drowns.

 

That's an easy one -- stop letting thugs out of prison ten years early. You want to preempt violence? Remove the violent people from society.

 

Mandate all smart phones lock themselves whenever they detect motion.

 

When you are at home have it in your pocket, holster or even your hand. When no one is home and you're not taking it with you leave it locked in a gun safe. This was not my idea and I'm not sure I agree with it but it's just as easy to say something positive about the idea as it is to say something negative about the idea. I think the majority of reasonable thinking people feel something needs to be done.

 

Attractive nuisance. A big blue shiny pool =/= a secreted firearm in a private residence.

 

How far are you willing to go in the name of public safety?

 

true and you would probably have no difficulty proving the gun had been stolen.

 

and intricate passwords for my laptop. 9999 or 1111 won't do anymore....nope, has to have upper and lower case, and a number sprinkled in there, and at least 8 digits.

 

Just another attempt at outlawing the guns real usefulness and the bare section of the 2nd amendment...

Should we put you in jail for 5 years because you were robbed and the robber used the money to buy drugs, then OD"D. It is your fault because you didn't lock up your money and he was able to rob you. Same illogical logic.

 

No no no, make it 55 digits. That is the same as locking up your gun.

 

And what is your guess about where I’m going with it?

 

How about locking people in their houses so the can’t kill anyone with their cars?

 

It is actually quite easy to make guns that cannot be used by anyone but their owners. The devices that do so are reliable, cheap, programmable for multiple authorized users and leave the gun totally functional for their programmed users at all times. They would deter theft and prevent guns being used against their owners. The NRA and various gun nuts have opposed shops even SELLING it with death threats

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6896af6e11cc

Do you understand what I'm saying here gunnies? The NRA and some of your fellow gun advocates want to limit your freedom to even BUY things to make your guns safer for your own families

This ENRAGES me and is one of the main reasons why I think we need to get rid of ALL the guns. This kind of thing indicates to me that some of your gun nuts are just that, NUTS, and they actually DO support insane mass murderers.

 

When they admit they think all guns should be gotten rid of, we appreciate it. we really do...it steels our resolve to reject any proposals, even the "common sense" ones, coming from the gun-grabber camp.

 

Right back Aleksander to the quote of Mao. "ALL political power comes out of the barrel of a gun", then he killed 40 million Chinese. THAT should ENRAGE you. Here is the simple formula the founding fathers came to to keep the populace armed.

If the people have effective weapons and the government doesn't=Anarchy
If the government has effective weapons (what you want) and the population doesn't, you have slavery.
If both the government and the people have effective weapons, you have some form of democracy.

So you want a totalitarian government because out of 320,000,000 million 4-10 people a year go nuts? Where is your mathematical logic on this?
You want to throw the baby out with the bath water?

It is simple, your freedoms and mine are not free, but you willing give those freedoms up for a little temporary security (and it will not work, it will bring a civil war here), Sad but true.

 

Way to go. Penalize a a large group of people just because it enrages you. The conversation has lead me to one conclusion. The goal is not to save lives, it is to get rid of gun owners and the NRA. If it happens to save a life or two in the process, that is just gravy.

 

What we know is gun control advocates get accused by the NRA of having a hidden agenda of confiscating guns. The NRA tells that lie to keep their base agitated. Yet....................
Poll: Most NRA members support comprehensive background checks
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...mbers-support-comprehensive-background-checks

 

Yes, that technology works If the batteries have died, if your wife grabs your weapon while you are not home etc. Doesn't work without ramifications to the owner. I can compromise here. If you want such a gun, fine, but don't force such a folly and foolery on the rest of us. Computers just don't work at times, that is why the self driving car is failing.
Further, they will figure out a way to disrupt your electronics inside the guns and then you will have no gun that works at all.
Don't you think things through? They do this with almost everything electronic today. They simply jam the signal from your hand print to the firing mechanism.

 

The use of red herrings like "When they admit they think all guns should be gotten rid of" is a transparent effort to cloud the debate.

 

Red herring? I'm merely paraphrasing your confederate's sentiment.

 

Get rid of all illegal immigrants in the US and your 10% reduction and more happens. Can we agree on doing that instead? It is for our children after all.

 

The article uses two words which mean the same thing to many people. However, the article very carefully chooses when they use those two words. The words are "comprehensive" and "all" or "universal".. The article says "
A Monmouth University poll released Thursday finds that 69 percent of NRA members support comprehensive background checks. Among gun owners not in the organization, 78 percent support requiring background checks for all firearm purchases.

Nearly 90 percent of non-gun owners back comprehensive background checks, the poll found."

I am not an NRA member. I favor comprehensive background checks. That means look at everything including criminal records and medical records and any other information available. However, I do not favor background checks for all gun purchases. The problem is that limits a private owner from selling or giving a way a gun without extensive record keeping and other invasions of privacy. Ultimately, it would come down to the needs to go to every house or storage area in the US to make sure a person has not accumulated a weapon illegally or gotten rid of it illegally. It is a bureaucratic nightmare as well as an invasion of privacy.