Proposed Legislation or Initiatives To Incentivize Safe Firearm Storage

[Ura-Ki]

Perhaps our new Gov'ner could get involved in this prosess!

 

[etrain16]

I disagree with any additional power granted to the State, so this is going to be difficult position to move forward. I believe and understand what this is and attempts to do, but I would push hard to keep it out of the States power circles.

I do agree with part of what @etrain16 proposes, and to my mind, this is what needs to be pushed hard, protecting our schools and our children! I don't know why this hasn't become the most central and most vociferously fought for legislation in all areas of this country , but the facts remain, no one is actively doing any thing to push for protections of our children! To me, this is nothing short of a travesty, a absolute failure to act in a decisively and productive manor to ensure the safety of our most cherished children! This cannot be allowed to stand, and I submit we unite to put our full weight and strength toward this goal firstly over any thing else! I also submit th at we need to push for serious mental health reform, and that we demand action in both fronts at the soonest!

I also disagree with any additional power granted to the state - as well as creating any new pitfalls for gun owners. I am 100% on board with pro-active legislation, especially that which shows us trying to solve the problem without undercutting our rights in the process.

 

[KKG]

Here in WA our Law Makers have already done pretty good. When we purchase a new Safe there is NO Sales Tax. That means a 10% savings right there. I'm a "Collector" and keep most of my "Collection" in Safes but I still have a few out where they can be gotten at; just in case!!!

 

[oneharmonic]

Secure storage laws can protect law abiding gun owners from this fate:

Texas school shooting victim family sues attacker's parents

The only people guaranteed to win a lawsuit are the lawyers.

 

[awshoot]

... And the furthest I would go toward a subsidizing of a safe would be a tax credit upto say, $500 - not a refund or check sent to you from the state, just a one time tax write off. ...

In WA the incentive would have to take a different form because we don't have state income tax, but it could be something that doesn't really cost the state anything -- like a free Discover Pass (needed to use state parks, about $30) or free hunting and/or fishing license. These wouldn't appeal to everyone but there are probably other things that could be offered as well. Maybe ferry passes would appeal to some people. Anyway, it could be a bit of smorgasbord to appeal to as many people as possible.

Edit: free car tabs would be a pretty universally desireable incentive that doesn't actually make the state pay for more than a sheet of paper and a sticker.

 

[awshoot]

Here in WA our Law Makers have already done pretty good. When we purchase a new Safe there is NO Sales Tax. That means a 10% savings right there. I'm a "Collector" and keep most of my "Collection" in Safes but I still have a few out where they can be gotten at; just in case!!!

This is true but there are people in WA who can easily afford a safe but don't have one. A little bit more incentive might get a few more people on board.

 

[cigars]

I agree with you, but....The left won't have it because what you are suggesting does't go nearly far enough. I can't say, specifically, what that is, it's just that it's the left! Nothing is far enough for them. Then there's the right, they won't have any such thing. The never give an inch crowd. Then there's the money factor. The party in charge in oregon won't cough up anything that would benefit fire arms owners. Oh, if you want to take $300,000.00 to put up lawn signs and speed limit signs, to slow Portland down to 20mph, from pot taxes? Here's you check!

Personally, My fire arms are secured. I consider any one living in areas that my be prone to burglaries and thievery, are irresponsible if they don't keep their arms secured. It's a "No-Brainer".

What you are describing is " personal accountability". Such a concept is vile to the proggies.

 

[oneharmonic]

What you are describing is " personal accountability". Such a concept is vile to the proggies.

Do you think a parent is personally accountable for their child?

 

[mkwerx]

Do you think a parent is personally accountable for their child?

To a certain point, yes. It is dependent on age of child, and the situation. I would also say that, because the state takes on the powers of a parent when children are at school - they should likewise be held responsible for what happens at the school, or more to the point - for preventing children from committing heinous acts. If kids get dad's unsecured guns, dad is responsible along with the child. School should be held responsible for lack of security if a kid can smuggle a gun in in theur backpack or lunch box. Schools should be held responsible for pushing the agenda of zero tolerance and not allowing children to effectively deal with assaults on them or bullies. A kid that can pop his bully in the face with a fist probably won't be the kid who shoots up the school.

A minor child, generally, legally cannot be held culpable to the same extint that adults can. Parents are responsible for their children's behavior and damage their child causes. At a certain point though we can say that a child has the ability to reason, and know right from wrong and assumes the bulk of the responsibility for those actions.

 

[justcuz]

The comments espoused are noble and noteworthy but you have forgotten a minor point.

It isn't the OR/WA legislators doing the damage!

It is the stupid historical statute [1900'] which allows citizens to initiate initiative(s), pander for signatures putting their noble initiative(s) on the ballot for all the uninformed voters to vote on, which if passed become law, without legislator or governor oversight.

There hands are tied and they can and do regularly, with clear conscience say at re-election time, they didn't have anything to do about the offending statuate and cannot, by law change it!

[sidebar: you do know all those voters living in apts/rentals/etc. are responsible for raising your property taxes don't you?]

 

[cigars]

Do you think a parent is personally accountable for their child?

To whatever point that you are trying to make, I would have to say look to the parents first if there is a problem with a child. That doesn't cover all of the bases all of the time but don't ignore the obvious.

 

[Herb g]

There is no dealing with these people, compromise is always in one direction, kiss your 2A rights goodbye or be prepared for a civil war. It may not be this time or even next time, but there it is.

Like the cut of your jib, tits. Anyone who thinks they will settle for compromise is still wet behind the ears. We need to go on the offensive alright, but not by giving them an inch. Read some Saul Alinsky.

 

[brenty]

I totally agree that providing incentive for people to safely store firearms would be a great idea. And in theory, I believe it would receive bipartisan support. But here is the issue, for all the people on the left who push hard for gun control, like actually take time out of their personal lives to campaign for gun control, those people (consciously, maybe some sub-consciously) are doing it to PUNISH gun owners because they view gun owners as sub humans who love their guns more then children.

I had my little cousin who I grew up with and have been close with all my life shout me down publicly on facebook telling me I should be ashamed of myself as a father, and If I cared about my son I would turn all my guns into the police immidiately. (along with a whole essay of ad homs attacking me personally)

This became very clear to me when I saw the amount of time and effort spent in the media to dehumanize gun owners, never were they even pretending that there is any moral equivalency between them and gun owners and we just had the wrong idea, no, it was implicit that it was because gun owners were lesser human beings.

This is the lefts main strategy. If you can convince people your opponent is a Nazi, biggot, white supremecist, racist, gun nut, red neck, uncle tom, nra apologist, deplorable, white privlege, etc.. you can prevent people from hearing your opponents argument. This is identity politics. Assign your ideological opponent to a group identity which they have deemed biased against you.

If only we could get pieces in the media to give us a chance to humanize the gun owners position, I think could make a massive impact. I listened to a speech from a lady who lives in the UK, she was in tears talking about how she cannot defend herself or her children no matter what, in fact it would be illegal to kill someone trying to rape or kill you. especially with the rising violent crime in london. and it made me think of my own story, I got my first gun shortly after I found out my son has Duchennes Muscular Dystrophy, along with some other developmental delays/issues and he also does not talk. This made me feel that he was even more vulnerable then children already are, and that it would be much more difficult to control a bad situation if my son were around due to his physical needs. I realized I was 100% at the mercy of ANYONE who decided they wanted to.. rob/rape/hurt/kill/kidnap my son or I. So I got myself a handgun and some training. I could not imagine going back to how vulnerable I used to feel and how guilty and useless I felt knowing I wouldnt be able to do anything about it if someone wanted to harm or take my son.

We must use emotion to moderate peoples ears open, and then once they view gun owners like just regular people like anyone else, with empathy, familys, jobs, like everyone else, THAT is when we hit em with the facts. Facts like less then 400 people per year die from rifles of any kind in a country of over 300 million, more likely to get struck my lightning then to get struck by a round from an ar 15.

 

[Herb g]

I disagree with any additional power granted to the State, so this is going to be difficult position to move forward. I believe and understand what this is and attempts to do, but I would push hard to keep it out of the States power circles.

I do agree with part of what @etrain16 proposes, and to my mind, this is what needs to be pushed hard, protecting our schools and our children! I don't know why this hasn't become the most central and most vociferously fought for legislation in all areas of this country , but the facts remain, no one is actively doing any thing to push for protections of our children! To me, this is nothing short of a travesty, a absolute failure to act in a decisively and productive manor to ensure the safety of our most cherished children! This cannot be allowed to stand, and I submit we unite to put our full weight and strength toward this goal firstly over any thing else! I also submit th at we need to push for serious mental health reform, and that we demand action in both fronts at the soonest!

Sorry Ura-Ki, but mental health reform won't help until you reform our culture...and that may be damn near impossible at this late date. Guns have never been the problem. Our children's brains have been (are being) warped by our liberal (progressive) culture - and have been since the '60's. I'm old enough to remember when kids were "normal"- part of that means they could tell right from wrong, and had respect for the laws of God and man. You think Russia has been meddling with us lately? Well, the old USSR has been here since the end of WWII ( McCarthy was right ), but they kicked it in gear in the '60's planting the seeds of Marxism in the anti-war movement. Those girls with flowers in their hair protesting at the induction center (and spitting on us on our way home), are now the grey haired old ladies of the feminist movement, and NOW/Ceasefire. They sent us overseas to protect our country from the encroach of Communism, when it was right here at home, taking over our infrastructure. They were in it for the long haul. As far as reaching common ground with the left on the school shooting problem...it will never happen. They are going for the whole enchilada. That means that they are willing to sacrifice the lives of scores/hundreds of school children, till it becomes so horrific that the public will demand private gun ownership be ended. They made their move after Florida, but the time wasn't right yet. The guns are the last piece of the puzzle before they can abolish the rest of our freedoms. It's not clear who "they" are yet, but the MSM and the left (but also some right) are the useful idiots in the lead. Trump is a big unexpected "hiccup" in their plan. "It" can still be turned around, but it may not be pretty. Don't give an inch! We could stop further school shootings cold - right now - but the left won't let it happen!

 

[awshoot]

Like the cut of your jib, tits. Anyone who thinks they will settle for compromise is still wet behind the ears. We need to go on the offensive alright, but not by giving them an inch. Read some Saul Alinsky.

I don't see it as a compromise -- I see it as separate independent action aimed at reducing or minimizing school shootings. As gun owners we should be interested in that if for no other reason than the fact that school shootings will tip the bulk of people in the middle, those who aren't yet Antis, into the Anti camp. At that point, you can kiss your guns goodbye or die in a firefight when they come to take them, neither of which are good outcomes. That's why I think we should focus on:

1. preventing kids from getting guns,
2. preventing kids who get guns from getting into schools,
3. preventing kids who do get guns into schools from doing mass damage.

All of these would help achieve that goal:

1. Secure firearms in such a manner that is hard for kids to get them -- safes for example.
   
2. Monitor the things kids bring into schools -- metal detectors, dress code, clear backpacks for example.
3. Ensure that any kid who gets into a school with a gun is neutralized fast -- arm teachers and if that is too politically charged, have armed guards (and more than one -- the guard should not be 100 yards away).
4. Harden schools to some extent with items that can be used as cover or architectural features that could serve a similar purpose.

That's not compromise, it as an independent solution designed to protect gun rights from the anti-gun marketing all these school shooters generate by their actions.

 

[titsonritz]

Yeah, sure, safes are a good idea, duh, most people I know that own guns already own safes. Why? Because they are responsible people with a clue. I've got two myself, but that doesn't mean all my guns are locked up in them. So how is any of this going to do anything except MAYBE give the touchy, feely crowd the warm fuzzies?

 

[awshoot]

Sorry Ura-Ki, but mental health reform won't help until you reform our culture...and that may be damn near impossible at this late date. Guns have never been the problem. Our children's brains have been (are being) warped by our liberal (progressive) culture - and have been since the '60's. ....

Depending on who you ask it will be too much religion or not enough religion; too much school or not enough school; too much information or not enough information; too much coddling or not enough understanding and support; etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum. These arguments are never ending and will never amount to anything aside from fiddling while everything burns down around us.

The fact is, kids are different now than they used to be and kids bringing guns to shoot up schools is a problem that has serious consequences for gun rights. We can protect our gun rights by preventing kids from getting guns, preventing those who get guns from getting them into schools, and preventing those who get guns into schools from doing much harm by making sure the shooter gets killed almost immediately. These are concrete ideas which are subject to concrete action.

 

[PiratePast40]

It'll never happen without reciprocal action toward those that do not choose to take the government handout. Even if you win the first battle, they will eventually come back with the argument that the state pays you to lock up your guns, therefore you are in violation of the desires of the state if you choose not to. Your initial arguments will then be used against you.

Expend the energy if you like, but I see it as a fools errand. You can't reason with people having temper tantrums and they will not be appeased until they take everything. Before the "then you come up with a better solution" people get going, let me remind everyone that just because I can't come up with a solution to stop Cain from killing Able, it doesn't mean that I'm complicit.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

How about reintroducing firearm safety at schools.

 

[titsonritz]

How about reintroducing firearm safety at schools.

View attachment 463487

That's not common sense enough.