Interesting Article Thread v.2

[Roscoe]

Statistically it's probably a wash at best. For a gun to be useful for home defense, you have to be able to get to it when the bad people kick in your door and come after you, so it can't be in a safe. It has to be a couple of seconds from ready to fire, so it has to be loaded.

If you have kids, you can't really leave a gun in this state. It has to be in the safe. I guess a gun in the safe would still be useful if your home invaders bellowed in the yard a while before crashing in, but this seems unlikely.

Ultimately the risk situation for an individual is going to vary because of stuff like this. I don't ever have kids around, so an accessible pistol isn't going to get in any trouble. I personally would be safer with it than without it, and I don't think I should be denied the right to have a gun just because other people would be less safe with a gun.

[Zenophas]

http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/13%20Re ... HB0206.pdf

[Ded10c]

http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/13%20Re ... HB0206.pdf

I suppose they intend to find some reliable way of proving intent to destroy evidence?

[MrTwosheds]

That looks extremely badly thought through, be interesting to see how many children die due that particular piece of legislation...I can only really assume that those proposing it have no actual interest in protecting children at all and simply seek to persecute doctors for attempting to save a child's life.
The biological evidence does not need to be living to prove the identity of the criminal, this proposed legislation may actually sentence child victims to death.

[Nielk1]

That looks extremely badly thought through, be interesting to see how many children die due that particular piece of legislation...I can only really assume that those proposing it have no actual interest in protecting children at all.
The biological evidence does not need to be living to prove the identity of the criminal, this proposed legislation may actually sentence child victims to death.

Its another case of batshit insane legislation that will be used to demean an entire half of our political system as crazies, even though only a few crazies wrote it.

[Roscoe]

They're not children, they're evidence.

[Zenophas]

They're not children, they're evidence.

With a little salt and peper, they're delicious.

[MrTwosheds]

Do you think it stands any chance of becoming law? I would have thought it would be overturned very quickly as soon as the first child (and fetus) died from an under age pregnancy.

[Zenophas]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-per ... 29509.html

[Red Spot]

I think the old "handgun in the drawer by the bed" is a pretty reasonable thing for people to have. It's kind of like a fire extinguisher... you will almost certainly not use it, but if you do need it, you need it really bad.

Plenty examples where children kill themselves, siblings or even (one of) their parents cause they happened to find the weapon and wanted to replay some movie/game they have seen. So imo it is not a reasonable thing for people to have, which is pretty much the definition why I am against it, cause people clearly cant take the responsibility needed with such devices.
If you really are desperate on owning a handgun you should 'first' make sure you have a safe where you can store it 'safelly', a 'drawer by the bed' is not safe.
Next, and still before purchasing the thing, is to learn what you're buying. Seeing how most people know how to spend money but are unaware of what they are actually buying, like seen with cars/computers on a daily basis, I personally am for very strict rules and possibly even 'pre-purchase testing' before you can ever be allowed to own one.
A car isnt designed to kill people yet people do kill other with them very frequent, a gun is designed to kill people ...

[Roscoe]

Plenty examples where children kill themselves, siblings or even (one of) their parents cause they happened to find the weapon and wanted to replay some movie/game they have seen. So imo it is not a reasonable thing for people to have, which is pretty much the definition why I am against it, cause people clearly cant take the responsibility needed with such devices.

If you read the rest of the post, it explains why a safe makes a gun pretty much useless for home defense, and that you have to keep the gun in a safe if you have children.

I never have children in my house. A gun isn't going to jump out of the drawer and go on a rampage.

If you want to protect everyone from their own stupidity, you're going to have to take away pretty much everything... at which point they'll start banging their heads together out of sheer boredom.

[GSH]

Fire. Ice. At once.

-- GSH

[Zenophas]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyat ... gh-school/

All over the internet.

[Ded10c]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyat ... gh-school/

All over the internet.

I suppose there's a problem with lying? "So help me God" is simply a turn of phrase, it doesn't pidgeonhole you into a religion.

[MrTwosheds]

It's the principle of not having religious beliefs or traditions forced onto people who do not follow them. The intent to do so is clear and not restricted to just this piece of legislation, maybe "one nation under Dogs" would be more appropriate, as it is clear that these people are intent on forcing their ways onto others and in doing so gradually destroy the liberty they would claim to protect.