No, but unless you have kids, why would you need to lock your guns up like that when you are home?
“Good” is relative. I support the Eddie Eagle program and actively promote efforts by the NRA to introduce it into local schools. You may or may not be surprised as to how much pushback from individuals we receive Simply because the program was developed by the NRA.
Ultimately, it appears that for too many, unenforceable safe storage laws are more important than actual free hands on safety instruction for youth. In my opinion, the two have very little to do with each other. Teaching kids how to be safe around firearms promotes far more “good” than hoping the local legislature might pass a law or two.
I’m not certain that any criminal justice system penalty- even the death penalty- is comparable to the risk of an intended victim retaliating with lethal force. Your own cites say that criminals seldom think in terms of eventual consequences, only immediate ones- and encountering an armed citizen is as immediate as it gets, and backs up the commonly reported fear by burglars of encountering armed residents.
One anecdote on this comes from Israel, which has seen any number of terrorists committing attacks that they knew they wouldn’t survive. But after the Ma’alot Massacre in 1974 Israel established a citizen watch program, where volunteers could be trained as police auxiliaries to be on watch and serve as on-the-spot responders. Reportedly, so many would-be terrorists were ignominiously killed by women and grandparents that gunman attacks were phased out in favor of bombings.
Based on the responses that I’ve gotten in this thread, I’m not sure if I buy the reason for their push-back. People seem to think I have a problem with the Eddie Eagle program when I’ve made it very clear that that is not the case.
Using your definition of unenforceable, possession of nuclear armaments and child pornography are also unenforceable, but I’m still okay with having laws in those respective categories.
That’s fine until people start to mention that the EE program is somehow inferior to safe storage laws. EE gets the message of gun safety in front of kids hoping that they will have half a chance of acting appropriately around a found or discovered weapon BEFORE someone gets hurt.
Safe storage laws punish after the fact that “something” has already occured like a shooting unless your ideas of safe storage allows for compulsory inspections or something.
I see the two as apples and oranges frankly, with the only commonality between them being guns.
For fucks sake, it does not have to be an exclusive-or situation.
Hey Velocity, since no one on the side of the NRA seems able to actually read my posts, I’ll go ahead and change my answer to “No, the NRA doesn’t do anything good.”
Thank you for a fine post.
AFAIK, the NRA does not oppose laws that require trigger locks or safe storage in homes with young children. They DO oppose making everyone having their guns not reachable in case of need. This is what DC required, for example.
So “safe storage” laws can mean a wide range of laws.
That, I think, is the exact definition of a “well-regulated militia”.
Not really wanting to hijack, but you are missing the point, killing the offender through the arming citizens is - in effect - increasing the certainty of being caught. This is why there is a change of method to bombs, if the chances of being caught setting bombs was near 100% then that would act as an effective deterrent.
Which I wouldn’t object to at all, provided it wasn’t used as an excuse to forbid people from participating.
True, although in reference to crime in the US there is a subculture that is so inured to arrest, prosecution and imprisonment that it is regarded merely as an unlucky break that might or might not occur sometime in the future. Again, long-term thinking is sadly absent in a percentage of the population, making short-term immediate deterrence more effective.
How would having a gun decrease the likelihood of being the victim of violent crime? A would-be thief is motivated by the desire to get valuables. They don’t, a priori, have to shoot anyone. But if their would-be victim draws a gun, the thief is going to start shooting, too.
As for the NRA, if they stood for what they claim to stand for, they’d be natural allies with Black Lives Matter. Philando Castille was killed by the police because he was a black man with a gun. Tamir Rice was killed by police because they thought he was a black man with a gun. An organization that genuinely supports people being allowed to have guns should be at the forefront of the fight for justice for them, and pushing to change policies to prevent further such incidents. Why don’t they?
what does that have to do with my post? Other than confirming it.
Guys, this is getting away from the NRA and into a general gun debate, of which we have plenty.
Yes, thanks DrDeth. We have dozens of gun threads already and I was meaning to ask specifically about the NRA’s merits itself as an organization and what good it does, rather than guns.
So you have an actual example of this safe storage law that they support?
“Mandates that all gun owners must lock up their firearms if they reside with a minor under 18 years of age.” The NRA opposed this law in Wisconsin. His cite didn’t confirm your opinion, it categorically refuted it.
The fence does NOT require the home-owner to unlock to access his/her own pool. It is to prevent wandering children from drowning. Do you often have wandering strangers in your home? Does wearing a holstered gun make you feel that is ‘safe’ storage? Children can’t get it after all… Sounds like that is what you should be advocating.
“… minor under 18 years of age.” ROFLMAO ! How many minors are OVER 18?