If people own guns to defend themselves against situations like home invasions, they are likely to want them easily accessible and ready to shoot when the unthinkable happens. If the weapons are stored in a safe, separate from ammuntion [sic], that could be marginally more difficult.
June 4, 2018
A Gun Owner Explains Why He Leaves His Pistol Loaded and Unsecured
[“…marginally more difficult”?
When seconds matter your gun and ammunition are only minutes away from being useful.
Deliberate dismissive wording and/or crap for brains? You decide.—Joe]
For some values of “Marginal”.
I vote for deliberate.
Nice purring words like that one minimize the burden to be imposed. It’s similar to the “apology” after sitting six hours on the tarmac waiting while every passenger misses a connection. “We apologize for any inconvenience this (not our incompetence, “this”) caused. Lawyers use this technique all the time. “MY solution will cause minor inconvenience — the other side’s solution will open the floodgates of litigation, dislocate global trade and cause dogs and cats to live together.”
At this time it can’t be lack of thought. He’s grasping at the last bit of control, keeping one’s guns but locking up the ammunition in a time-lock. For family safety, you know.
Based just on the quote, I read it as sarcastic / ironic understatement.
It’s an article in The Trace. Read About The Trace before you get too firmly committed to that hypothesis.
The author is a gun prohibitionist.
That’s what I would have said, too. But I read the quote in context. He’s carefully choosing words to downplay how much more difficult it is to quickly get a working firearm when gun and ammo are stored separately.
I’m going with “deliberately dismissive”.
Similarly, later: “[Ralph] Myers exemplifies the defiant self-defense ethos that dominates American gun culture.” (emphasis added)
That particular quote’s verbiage leaves the impression that gun owners are all (or mostly) anti-government. It’s not that we’re reasonably opposed to specific laws and proposals. No, we’re just “defiant”. Against everything, even “common-sense, reasonable” proposals. Because “gun culture”.
There is also the fact that fine motor skills go out the window under stress, what the hell is the access code? why won’t the key work? etc, A biometric lock may be faster, but now you’re at the mercy of the batteries. There is no one solution for everyone, but mandated storage requirements will get some homeowners killed.
That, OR it’s no one’s business but your own.
One or the other.
Maybe this is one of the biggest failings of our society, or of all human history; that concept which says some things (many things) in the life of the individual exist fully outside the jurisdiction of the clever thoughs, ideas, plans, plots, wishes and musings of all others. That is to say, the very concept of liberty, or of free will, is understood by a scant few.
B-b-b-b-but we’re the educated ones, we’ve been to all the right graduate schools and know how things work much better than the people who have to do it every day. We’re the experts! We’re the anointed, We deserve to be in control.
“[Comrade Napoleon] would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?”
The whole point of that mindset is that they don’t trust you with a firearm, and ANYTHING that impedes your use of it for defensive use is a good thing. Because self-defense is a bad thing. You might harm the King’s men, and that isn’t allowed. The King’s power must remain absolute.
Because any time it didn’t work, they can say “look, he had a gun and it didn’t save him. Eventually the argument that it would improve one’s odds of survival is wiped away by the premeditated accessory to murder that is “safe” storage.
This was already put to bed in Heller:
“In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment , as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.”
So pass all the stupidshit “safe storage” laws you want. They’ve been pre-ruled unconstitutional and I won’t be adhering to any bureaucrat or gun prohibitionist’s uneducated, head in the sand idea of how I need to store my weapons.
What bothers me the most is that these people really believe they can pass a law against stupidity. As if we just pass some diktat requiring people to render their firearms inoperable for use, it will make stupid people and criminals handle their firearms more intelligently. This malum prohibitum bullshit will never accomplish its stated intent, it violates my rights, compromises my ability to defend my family, and I will not comply.
Re: the authors wapo article.
This notion that we shouldn’t ever be afraid, and that the NRA is somehow fooling people into being afraid for their lives as a marketing tactic to drive subscription sales, couldn’t be more ignorant of real world events. I can’t think of a more “unwoke” way of existing.
Fear is the human condition. Humans are born as impulse driven animals and the thin veneer of civilized humanity frequently peels back to expose our evil, animalistic core. Even the most liberal news outlet covers this. Ignorance of reality, for the sake of some alleged right to never have to feel afraid, is not an affirmative self defense strategy.
Just like paranoids sometimes do have real enemies, sometimes people do face the threat of a home invasion and their defensive measures are both prudent and necessary.
I agree that the Heller decision ended this whole line of infringements and I will not comply.
Yablon is pretty good insofar as he can wrap up so many old, false premises and projections into a short article.
“…a majority of gun owners support laws that would hold them liable if their weapons got into the wrong hands.”
“The National Rifle Association has fostered the idea that Americans need lethal self-defense at all times, and gun companies, which now produce more handguns than any other type of weapon, cater to this fear.”
The best, most effective lies contain a lot of truth. What’s being misrepresented here is the fear angle. Governments all rule by fear (“Obey, or we will crush you!”) whereas the American Principles of Liberty, including the notion “that all men be armed”, are designed to foster confidence. Confidence is incompatible with fear.
Catering to fear is what authoritarians like Yablon do at every turn. Catering to and fostering confidence is what Americans do.
The Yablons of the world would rule us through fear, while accusing us of being chicken-shits.
You have to give them credit; they’re excellent projectionists and marvelous liars!
That’s a wonderful try, Mr. Yablon. Really, but the thing is, your ilk are trying to scare people into compliance all the time. A true American never does that. A true American leaves other people alone, respects the rights of others, loves to see other people (of all colors) succeed in confidence, will bend over backwards to help them in that endeavor, and expects others to respect his rights accordingly. Notice the absence of fear in that equation?
In the American System, practiced to full fruition, no one is fearful but the criminal, or the one who falls for the lies of authoritarians and Progressives.
Confidence = con (with) + fideo (truth, or faith, or faith in truth).
You lack confidence, Mr. Yablon, and I and any other American would like to see you find the truth, and thus confidence. Then you could use your impressive writing talents to foster and nourish the truth, the confidence, in others rather than embarrass yourself by engaging in idiotic nitpicking over how they store their gasoline, matches, knives, chemicals and power tools.
We betray OUR lack of imagination when we think they will stop at gasoline, matches, knives, chemicals and power tools. Remember how Susie used the Ammonia in the movie “Wait Until Dark”? Far safer to just get the police.
How many spices and of what variety do you have in your kitchen cabinet? How much pre-ground black pepper or red pepper do you have on hand — is it in an excessive quantity in an assault container? Never mind if you think it might be useful for defense — fresh ground is better and too much will only get you into trouble. Other spices are not as famous but just as dangerous.
The ways our “betters” want to rule and control us, like so many debeaked chickens in a Tyson’s plant are infinite.
If you store your weapons in a safe, the safe does not need to be locked when you are home. The weapons may be stored loaded, they do not need to be stored empty. You may carry at home, regardless of whether you may carry abroad. Unless the plan is to inspect every home daily, there is no way for the rulers to enforce their edicts.
So? The safe is probably not right next to where you’re sitting, so even with an open door it amounts to storage away from where the need is.