Subject:
|
Re: Trying to understand
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 16 Mar 2000 15:58:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
275 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Duane Hess writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Trigger locks increase the time it takes (me, anyway) to get my gun
> > ready to use, when I am operating in total darkness and in silent mode,
> > by a large enough amount that they seriously decrease my personal
> > safety. Where would you like me to keep the key to a trigger lock so
> > that I can find it in the dark without making any noise but so that it's
> > safe from my kids finding it? My kids are clever but not persistent
> > enough to guess a 4 digit combination lock.
>
>
> That is a good point. However, I still feel that the trigger locks
> should be in place when a gun is sold. Whether or not they remain
> there after the gun is sold, I have no control of.
My issue there is the slippery slope. Just as with seatbelts. Note well that I
support seat belt usage and I've even come to terms with mandatory seat belt
usage. But once locks are required to be shipped, it's not much of a stretch to
"required to be used at all times"
> Having the lock in place to me, reinforces the
> notion to the buyer that the gun is not a toy and that special precautions
> need to be taken with it to avoid accidents.
>
> > Trigger locks are a direct attack on the notion of using a gun in self
> > defense.
>
> Could you expand on this statement for me.
See above. If their use becomes mandatory, it interferes with the ability to
use a gun in home defense for reasons I outlined.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Trying to understand
|
| (...) to (...) I have this silly picture in my mind of a western showdown at high noon, where the two participants square off. Crowds gather. Sweat drips down their faces. Steely eyes glare unblinkingly. Fingers twitch, waiting for the other guy to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Trying to understand
|
| (...) Ahh! Now I see what you're saying. That is a valid fear. I don't see that particular scenerio coming about though. It's too hard to enforce a law like that as a primary infraction. In order to enforce it, enforcement agencies would have to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Trying to understand
|
| (...) how (...) would (...) by (...) little (...) Thank you Larry. I'm glad that I know of at least one individual who has a relatively safe storage method. I understand the need for speed and the need for safety as well. It sounds like you have (...) (25 years ago, 16-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
139 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
