-If that. An article I read about this exact topic, had the writer experimenting- under supervision, of course, and with “Snap Cap” plastic dummy rounds- with having a child attempt to chamber a round. I forget the kid’s age, but very young, three to five, max. When instructed, the kid struggled with the slide a little and could barely budge it. After less than two minutes, the kid- on his own idea- jammed the base of the slide against the edge of a nearby coffee table and leaned on it.
Chambered a 'cap like he’d practiced it that way.
-Welded steel box? Like the arrows are some kind of monster?
Nothing so drastic. Broadheads unscrew from the shaft and are typically modular for edge replacement or resharpening. Simply remove them, dismantle them, and put 'em back in the box (or a small box.) At that point they’re no more dangerous than eXacto or razor blades (which is still admittedly dangerous, but not “look at this cool spear!” attractive to a curious kid.)
Replace the broadheads with target points or even blunt “Judo” heads. Or just leave the broadheads off until you want to use it. A blunt arrow is all but harmless- and if the kid can’t yank the slide on a handgun yet, she sure won’t be able to get a draw on a bow.
If anything, you’d have to worry about the rug-rat taking the arrows and using 'em as sticks, smacking 'em against trees and things.
Hey, how was I to know they were hollow and bent easily?
As for your “argument”, I fail to see it’s validity.
That doesn’t surprise me in the least.
Then this:
Are you sure the death you read about didn’t wise you up?
Yes I am sure it didn’t “wise me up”. Although this event happened over twenty years ago I can remember all of the details of what happened. This happened to a family who lived down the road from my grandparents who we would visit durring the summer. The boy who was shot was named Tony I can’t remember his brother or sisters names but Tony and his brother where cleaning the house and the first story to come out was that while vaccuming they had knocked the shotgun off the mantle where it hung and when it hit the floor it fired and Tony was hit and killed. I also remember when the truth came out that Tony and his brother where playing cowboys and indians and his brother actually took the gun from the wall and pointed it at Tony and pulled the trigger. I remember quite well thinking after the truth came out that these guys where older than I was and should have known better than to be messing around with a REAL gun like that.
To end the story the family moved about six months later I think the mother and father divorced later very very sad story Tony was a good guy and would have grown up into a great person. Had their father taken the time to educate his children about guns instead of keeping them in the house as inanimate objects maybe he would still be here.
As for this:
nswgru1 --I am not “stupid” and this is not the BBQ Pit. Please recall that there are rules of civility on this Board.
Hey I didn’t direct that statement spicifically at you but if you want to take it that way be my guest. You slipped your foot into that shoe I didn’t force you.
Since you seem to want me to try to justify to you ownership of more than one of each type of weapon all I have to say is that I don’t have to. This is still a relatively free country and as such I don’t have to justify any of my gun purchases to you or anybody else for that matter and if the time ever comes where I do then that will be justification enough.
Malone Labe
nswgru1
(whose wife complains about a gun in every coner of the house and whose standard reply is we need more corners)
And add “before worrying about protecting your family from home invasion” to it.
Just for some perspective, this from an article in Pediatrics reviewing long term trends in Vital Statistics
Bolding mine. Use your car seat all the time. Improvements in the rates of childhood mortality have come from analysis of what kills kids and intervention … sometimes mandated interventions.
Please don’t assume that your child can not get to the gun. My father had the pistol where none of us could possibly get hold of it. (he thought) One day he walked into the bedroom to find my 3 year old brother with the loaded pistol in his lap! So don’t hide it, lock it. We were lucky, no one was shot.
What a bunch of alarmists! Get a gun safe, put guns in safe, end of story. And what is this about the arrows? Do you people get rid of your kitchen knives too? Doesn’t anyone have a workbench with chisels and saws?
I was raised in a house that where guns were always available. Some of my earliest memories are of my father helping me hold a .22 and shoot cans in the back yard. Good times. I never once played with or even looked at the guns with out permision. Today, if I had kids I would probably keep my guns in a locked safe, not because I would worry about my kids, but because of the potential for a visiting friend to cause a problem. I certainly would not put the bolts down at the bank.
and feel that your questions deserve a direct answer.
Nothing is risk free, but there are degrees of risk that we all take. Car accidents kill more kids than anything else, yet we all are willing to take that risk to afford the advantages of automotive travel. You can keep your guns in a way that minimizes the risks to near negligible levels. With proper storage I do not believe that you are irresponsible to own weapons with kids in the house. The final question is the value judgement that only you can answer. These guns include heirlooms of sentimental value. Is it worth the investment of money and effort to keep them responsibly? That depends on what they are mean to you.
Now for my curiousity. Can I poll the gun owners here? How many are like Ribo and feel that locked storage is not needed and that if an unsecured gun is stolen and used in a crime that the owner does not share culpability? And how many feel “guns in safe, end of story.”?
DSeid, even if I were to remove the front door from my home and lay the valuables out in the middle of the living room floor, that does not give you the right to walk in and take anything from my house. I am deeply offended by this mentality that if something is not chained down it’s free for the taking. Whether there is a door or not, whether there is a lock or a safe or anything at all, makes no difference whatsoever - if you take something from my house, you have violated my space, my property, and the sanctity of my home, and YOU are the criminal, bearing all moral responsibility, regardless of the law.
The victim does not share ANY culpability in a theft, or in any crimes committed with stolen goods.
What I respond to with hostility is the intellectual dishonesty and outright lies which seem to come so often from gun control proponents. Initially when you started talking about ‘responsible owners’ I simply asked you what you meant by various things that you said, but you failed to answer even the most basic questions about what the ‘responsibility’ you claim exists entails and continued to make assertions unsupported by facts. Since you are continuing to make the same vague allegations of irresponsibility and assertions unsupported by facts despite having been called on it before, I see no reason for anything but hostility.
(Also, I’m not at all suprised by the pattern - GC proponent makes all kinds of allegations against gun owners, then is suprised when they dare to question what he says without obsequious politeness. GC proponent follows it up with lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth about how inappropriate the treatment they recieve is. Hint: if you’d start off with politeness and basic intellectual honesty, you might get more in return.)
Aside from your list being amusingly incomplete (which I’m not going to detail, since it’s irrelevant), your category 4 is absurdly broad. You asserted that guns stolen from a private residence because they were not “secured” are a significant source of guns for criminals. “Stolen” does not mean ‘stolen from a private residence’, it would include firearms stolen while being shipped (single packages or trucks from manufacturers), firearms stolen from manufacturers, distributors, or retailers, and firearms stolen from the police and military. NONE of those other potential stolen guns have anything to do with the guns that people keep in their homes, so even if you did have a cite showing that most guns were stolen, it wouldn’t back your oft-repeated assertion.
Why am I not suprised? You keep blaming gun owners for arming criminals on the basis that we don’t keep handguns properly secured (conveniently not defining what ‘properly secured is’), but you can’t show that “improperly secured” handguns later stolen account for even a tenth of a percent of the guns used by criminals.
[QUOTE]
Handguns accounted for 468 (89%) of 524 firearm homicides and 124 (71%) of 175 firearm suicides. Handguns of .25 caliber accounted for 14% (n = 63) of 438 firearm homicides and 12% (n = 15) of all firearm suicides in which caliber was known. The Raven MP-25 was the single most commonly identified firearm
That should be ‘stolen from private residences while not meeting Dseid’s undisclosed definition of secured’, BTW.
The conclusion that at least one handgun has been ‘stolen from a private residence while not meeting Dseid’s undisclosed definition of secured’ is reasonable, but the conclusion that that is a significant source of supply for criminals (which Dseid’s constant allegations rests on) is not. While ‘legitimate gun owners supply the guns for criminals’ is one of the assertions gun-controllers make when attempting to pass yet another restriction on the freedom of law-abiding gun owners, it’s unsupported in fact as Dseid’s desperate dodgins clearly shows.
You made the claim (repeatedly and despite having been asked to support it), you back it up. I’m not going to get sidetracked into arguing about how many guns go missing from police custody or get stolen from sources other than private residences, as it would be a sidetrack from pointing out that your assertions have no backing in fact.
Would you leave a kid asleep on a park bench and say that it isn’t your fault when someone picked them up and kidnapped them? I think not, you’d ‘secure’ your kid by putting them in a house with a locked door and locked windows. Well, if your kid gets kidnapped I say that it was your irresponsibility that allowed the kidnapper to get to the kid, and that you should have secured your child properly. You have an OBLIGATION to protect your child from those who would do him harm, and I find your neglect of this obligation shocking and disturbing.
Although you have been asked ad nauseum to define what you mean by ‘secured’, you STILL haven’t done so. Is a gun secured, not easily stolen, if it is as protected from theft as your car, jewelry, and TV are protected from theft, or as secured against theft as your child is from kidnapping or rape? I think the fact that you have refused to answer even so basic a question about what warrants the ‘irresponsible’ label you keep slapping on gunowners speaks volumes about what your real concerns are.
Ummm. If I left my baby out alone sleeping on the park bench and she was kidnapped, then yes, I’d say I share in the blame. And so would society. It is called neglect.
I have done so on multiple occassions and do again now. Locked unloaded in a secure safe when not under direct supervision of its owner. Oh yes, that shows my uncooked hatred for those who believe that are at dire risk from home invasion.
In terms of intellectual honesty, try it sometime.
So do you secure your child in a locked safe when not under your direct supervision?
And you think society at large shares in the blame for your incompetence at leaving a child unattended in a public place? Society didn’t do it, you did. I’m a part of society, and I sure as hell wouldn’t feel any responsibility for your neglect.
But, by the same token, if I were to leave my rifle sitting unattended on a park bench, yes, I’d be at fault for its theft. However, if it’s stolen from inside my house, I accept no responsibility whatsoever, because nobody has any business snooping around my house to see if my guns (or any other of my property) are secure, and sure as hell nobody has any business removing anything from my home without my permission, regardless of how it is stored.
I agree wholeheartedly with Joe_Cool. We have guns in our house and no one has any business coming in here. I’m thoroughly sick and tired of people wanting to blame society for individual’s behavior. Each person is responsible for their own behavior, period.
All this ridiculous sueing going on because somebody chokes on a hamburger at McDonald’s or something. Who told them to buy a McDonald’s hamburger? If they don’t know how to eat right, stay home.
Also, I’ve heard of criminals breaking in to people’s houses, getting hurt, and sueing the homeowner! Any judge that doesn’t throw that out of court, needs to be in a mental facility.
What I’m trying to say is, people have no right to blame or sue anyone for any problem they have resulting from their own destsructive behavior. McDonald’s isn’t responsible for how you eat and if you choke. Maxwell House isn’t responsible if you burn yourself on their coffee. Get real.
Joe_Cool isn’t responsible if some idiot criminal breaks into his house, takes his guns or anything else and he’s not responsible for what the criminal does with them, either. Period.
Let’s put the blame where it belongs, people, and stop being totall preposterous.
Criminals mainly get guns illegally. A significant portion through theft. Kids are the most likely to have obtained their guns by theft and I doubt that they are stealing from the manufacturer or the big dealer.
How big of a problem is gun theft?
What kind of gun gets stolen? Those rifles locked up, or those handguns laying around for self-defense?
Firearm deaths, mainly with handguns are a significant cause of death in this country. Especially of youth.
Many of those handguns come to the market through “straw man” purchases, and through illegal resellers. A significant number of guns, especially handguns, are stolen from private rsidences every year. By definition, these become guns available to criminals.
As to whether or not gun owners are responsible enough to store their weapons in such a way as to make it less easliy stolen, I remain interested in the opinions being expressed. In a previous thread I was told that regulation requiring safe storage was unneeded because most legal gun owners are responsible folk. So much for that POV.
Scylla. I’ve got no irons in this fire. I’m not a NRA member, or personally a gun owner.
However, like yourself, I was an evil child who got into everything. And I can tell you this much: Guns are no different from any of a thousand other items, as far as safety is concerned. In my house we had caustic chemicals, poisons in pretty bottles, drill presses and table saws, and fireworks. They were all kept safe behind locked or childproofed doors, but I knew where they were. And because I knew what they were, I didn’t have much call to mess with them when I didn’t need to.
Lock the cabinet well. Triggerlock your pistol. And take your child shooting, train her in gun safety. Make an outing of it. But don’t make it a great bugaboo… because then it becomes interesting.
Then by the same ‘logic’ you’ve used for your ‘blame gun onwers’ proposal, if you fail to lock your kid in a secure safe whenever they’re not under your direct supervision, you’re culpable if they get kidnapped. For that matter, anyone on perscription medication who doesn’t store it in a safe is guilty of dealing drugs if someone steals their medication and sells it on the street.
Then be so kind as to provide a link to the thread in which you did - I know I’ve never seen you post the definition you posted below in the past.
“Secure” sounds like a copout - how are you defining secure? I have a strange feeling it may be ‘one that a burglar couldn’t break into’, so that you can simply claim that any safe that was successfully cracked was insufficiently secure, and that the owner is therefore responsible for any later crimes.
More significantly, you still haven’t explained how you have arrived at the conclusion that gun storage needs to meet this requirement, but that its fine for people to leave their children easily accessible for the potential kidnapper or their prescription drugs handy to supply a drug dealer.
It certainly does; your secure storage definition specifically included ‘unloaded’. How does unloading the gun make it harder to steal? All it does is render the gun useless for self-defense; if anything the burglar is more likely to accedentally shoot himself while stealing a loaded gun. The fact that you claim your requirements are there only to prevent theft yet when you finally produce what your requirements are you include a provision that works heavily against use of the gun for self-defense and does nothing (or makes easier) theft of the gun is pretty damning evidence of what your real motives are.
What’s especially interesting here is the contrast between riducle of people who would defend themselves on the basis that home invasion is a low-probability event, and the categorization of gun owners as ‘irresponsible’ if they have a gun outside of a safe while they’re asleep because a criminal could easily steal the gun while they’re sleeping. Can you provide some explanation of how someone with a shred of intellectual honesty in their being could manage to both believe that break-ins of occupied dwellings are so rare that worrying about them is paranoia and that break-ins of occupied dwellings are so common that leaving a handgun in a nightstand for self-defense is a major supplier of weapons to ‘young punks’?
Without even reading the doj doc, it doesn’t support your assertions - just your assertions in this post and the quoted material supposedly backing them don’t match up.
Your doubt is not a cite, especially since ‘kids’ includes 20 year-olds with prior felony convictions according to HCI (or whichever name they’ve switched to now, I can’t keep up with the Brady Bunch name game). Hmm… I also notice that you said ‘manufacturer or big dealer’ - what about the gun club or other remote site where your pals often say people should store their guns?
Also, while you’ve got percentages of how many juveniles steal guns, nothing in what you quoted says that they stole a gun from someone who owned one legally - are these thefts just one “young punk” taking another “young punk”'s gun? Given the other inconsistencies in what you’ve posted, I know which way I’m inclined to believe.
Yup, I’d like a cite to support that claim. Your cite did not include the state of the guns stolen, so you’re going to need one to back up your assertion that the rifles were ‘locked up’ and that the handguns were ‘laying around’.
Rather damningly for your whole ‘secure storage’ argument, absolutely nothing in the text you quoted showed whether the stolen guns were stolen from a safe, from inside of some other locked container, from inside of a house, or from the park bench of your eariler example.
What’s your definition of youth? Is a 20-year old gang member one of the youths whose deaths you’re talking about?
“Less easily stolen” than what? Interesting, isn’t it, that gun control proponents like Dseid always make those vague comparative arguments that could keep being applied right up to a complete ban (Well, it needs to be less easily stolen than now… now you’ve got to do this stuff to make theft harder, now this additional, now…) especially when they haven’t even shown that the assertions behind their ‘responsibility’ argument are true yet.
Of course, you still haven’t shown that legal gun owners are any more irresponsible with their guns than you are with your kids.
It’s hard to judge, too, because who know? Maybe you’re daughter won’t even like guns or want to mess with them. My parents had two rifles and a shot gun on the gun rack, a .22 pistol in a holster in the closet, and one of those itty bitty pistols in the sock drawer. I think the ammo for the big guns was locked up in the gun rack, but the bullets for the .22 were in the holster with the gun, and I think the bullets for the little pistol were also in the sock drawer. I guess we were a public service announcement waiting to happen, but my sister and I just didn’t seem that interested in them.
Now dad’s dirty magazines, that’s what they couldn’t keep us out of!
At least 341,000 guns are stolen from private residences every year and 60% are handguns, the type of gun prefered for criminal intent and, convienently, the ones most likely left unsecured for use in “home defense.” That’s roughly 210,000 handguns taken from private residences and put into the hands of criminals. Every year.
But locking them up isn’t needed, cause there’s no evidence that locking things up deters their theft. Right.
Oh, but these were posted before you interupted an otherwise mostly mutually respectful dialogue with your rants. After you asked I again stated
What is secure? Well now you all know gun safe technology better than I do. I won’t claim enough expertise to know what’s out there. But yes, the same level of security that you’d be comfortable storing $20,000 in, perhaps. Enough that the casual home break-in won’t be able to get it, anyway.
