Originally Posted by Popgun
Thanks for the responses.
I don't disagree with the philosophy you all share about our freedom under the 2nd ammendment and I don't know if there would be follow-up requirements having to do with safes in the future (it hasn't happened in Kali), but in Washington's desire to do "something", I would rather see them require safe firearm storage options rather than something more draconian like firearm registration, mag limits, or outright bans on gun types. Maybe they could just give the american taxpayer a tax credit for buying upgraded firearm safes. They seem to need the ability to say they have done "something" before they will be willing to let this topic go away.
Again, I'm on your side on this and just wanted to get some feed-back on an idea.
I know where you're coming from - but we have to look at it from a "this **** stops here" standpoint.
They want you to be okay with a little erosion at a time.
Is it a nuisance to buy a gun safe? Nope. Not at all...unless the price its self is too steep...Government has no Constitutional authority to require you to purchase something that you have a right to own.
(And before anyone responds with the knee jerk car insurance response, i'll rebut: You don't have a Constitutional Right to an automobile. You do to a firearm. Nobody is forcing you to buy a Dictionary so you don't sound like a total dip **** when speaking w/ your 1st Amendment)
But this is always where people dumb the argument down and say "But you don't kill people with your words"
Yes. You do. In fact, more people have died from words than any other single thing in the history of man kind. Religion. Cults. "Orders". All are responsible for killing - the instruments used in the killings are many and vary far and wide, but the words themselves have not changed over the centuries, just the dialects with which they are spoken.
Some people attribute this "need for a right" to the gun its self, but they're not thinking deeply enough. It's not about the gun, it's about the freedom to own the gun. Private possession of firearms is the ultimate form of expression a nation can boast to show freedom.
Anyone who feels unsafe because someone like me has a gun is an idiot. They're cowards and until they grow up and face the real world, they get no respect from me. No willingness to compromise. I've done NOTHING to these people, yet I'm being labeled a criminal.
Requiring people to own a gun safe but not requiring them to use it is not doing ANYTHING. It's a typical LIBERAL MINDED
feel good law that could better be thought through by a 15 year old Special Needs kid in High School.
I'm all for responsible gun ownership, but I don't need Government to require me to buy something. There are better ways of doing this that do not infringe on LAW ABIDING CITIZENS
rights. They DO infringe on CRIMINALS RIGHTS
And when you mention this to a gun grabber, they always side w/ the criminal, that's why I will not "compromise" because to them this isn't about making the world safer, it's about getting rid of guns.
Getting rid of guns doesn't make the world safer. It makes it more dangerous. Because the only guys you can get rid of are the ones willingly handed over. And criminals aren't going to do that.
To prove my point - next time you're speaking with a gun grabber, pitch them this idea:So - you're for keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, but not taking mine, right?Yes, that's correctSo then how about we give police the authority to randomly search the persons and homes of known offenders at any time to make sure they are not in possession of any firearms (since criminals cannot own firearms)Well, that would be an invasion of that persons privacy. They paid their dues, they should not be singled out because of something from their past
They care more about the rights of Sexual Predators and Child Rapists than they do about the rights of a law abiding citizen.