Cops want you to lock up your guns...they don't want to lock up their guns....

[2aguy]

Of course the democrats proposing this stupid law have access to tax payer financed security...armed security, if they need it........and of course the cops don't want to have to follow this stupid law.....but the ones targeted...the peaceful law abiding citizen who will be required to lock up their guns in safes.......

So....will they search your homes.....?

And in a country of over 90 million homes with gun inside them, how many children are killed because of accidental gun use.........under 100 each year.

Why don't the cops want to lock up their guns...because if they have to deal with a home invader, it may make it harder to save themselves......

Police Want Exemptions from New Los Angeles Gun Restrictions PJ Tatler

Before you start reading this story, it’s important to remember that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect citizens from the tyranny of the state. Thus, when state agents want extra special protection not afforded to the citizen, we have a problem.


Los Angeles is looking to impose even more gun restrictions on its residents. City Councilman Paul Krekorian’s gun control plan is designed to protect children from deadly accidents, although it certainly is not designed to protect children who live in a house victim to a violent robbery or break-in. This new “plan” will require residents to lock away their handguns and disable them with trigger locks.


You might as well just drop your self-defense weapons off in another zip code.

 

[2aguy]

And get what these assholes say........

The police union, however wants an exception to this rule. The proposal currently exempts active-duty and reserve officers but not retired police officers.


In a letter to city lawmakers, the union argued that current and former officers needed quick access to guns for protection, citing the 2013 armed rampage by former LAPD Officer Christopher Dorner as an example of police and their families being targeted. Retired officers have gone through extensive training on controlling their weapons, union officials said.


“To protect themselves and society … you have to give them the ability to respond quickly,” league Director Peter Repovich said.


#civilianlivesmatter


You know who else might need “quick access to guns for protection”? Crime victims.


Other state agents are entitled to extra special protection too: “permits can be granted to judges, current and retired officers and other applicants approved by local law enforcement officials.”


Councilman Joe Buscaino, a former cop who supports the exemption, said, “Anyone who wears a badge — both present and in the past — are police.” He added” “I’m just looking at their personal safety.”

 

[Slyhunter]

Don't all citizens deserve that right?

To protect themselves and society … you have to give them the ability to respond quickly,” league Director Peter Repovich said.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Of course the democrats proposing this stupid law have access to tax payer financed security...armed security, if they need it........and of course the cops don't want to have to follow this stupid law.....but the ones targeted...the peaceful law abiding citizen who will be required to lock up their guns in safes.......

So....will they search your homes.....?

And in a country of over 90 million homes with gun inside them, how many children are killed because of accidental gun use.........under 100 each year.

Why don't the cops want to lock up their guns...because if they have to deal with a home invader, it may make it harder to save themselves......

Police Want Exemptions from New Los Angeles Gun Restrictions PJ Tatler

Before you start reading this story, it’s important to remember that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect citizens from the tyranny of the state. Thus, when state agents want extra special protection not afforded to the citizen, we have a problem.


Los Angeles is looking to impose even more gun restrictions on its residents. City Councilman Paul Krekorian’s gun control plan is designed to protect children from deadly accidents, although it certainly is not designed to protect children who live in a house victim to a violent robbery or break-in. This new “plan” will require residents to lock away their handguns and disable them with trigger locks.


You might as well just drop your self-defense weapons off in another zip code.

A weapon locked away in a safe that isn't ready to be a weapon at a moment's notice, like when a bad guy smashes youw indow and is climbing into your home, isn't a weapon.

Weapons are only weapons loaded and (ideally) condition 3.

 

[bucs90]

Um...did cops propose this silly law? Or just wants eexemption?

 

[WinterBorn]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

 

[martybegan]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

Nice of you to be able to afford that. I guess poor people need to sod off then.

 

[bucs90]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

Cool. I read the 2nd Amendment. It doesnt mention any compromises though.

 

[WinterBorn]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

Nice of you to be able to afford that. I guess poor people need to sod off then.

Eh, I didn't say it was a perfect solution. And you can get a biometric pistol safe for around $200 or so.

Here is one for $112.42.

GunVault GV1000C-STD Pistol Safe Mini Standard GV1000C-STD

 

[WinterBorn]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

Cool. I read the 2nd Amendment. It doesnt mention any compromises though.

No it doesn't. But if you have small children in your house, you need a way to keep your gun out of their hands. If you want it readily accessible, this is a good way.

 

[martybegan]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

Nice of you to be able to afford that. I guess poor people need to sod off then.

Eh, I didn't say it was a perfect solution. And you can get a biometric pistol safe for around $200 or so.

Here is one for $112.42.

GunVault GV1000C-STD Pistol Safe Mini Standard GV1000C-STD

Then you buy it, and let other people worry about their own houses.

Here's another exercise, if you care about them so much, agree to this: If someone dies because the government required them to have one of these and it failed, or caused them a delay that got them hurt, you suffer the exact same injury. Put your body where your keyboard is.

 

[Alystyr]

Um...did cops propose this silly law? Or just wants eexemption?

Silly law? Definitely.
It's the police that are wanting an exemption, because they can see the ramifications. The only reason (IMO) that they're only asking for themselves is that they have a vested interest in the issue, and in reality don't have the standing to request the exemptions for anyone else.

But if you have small children in your house, you need a way to keep your gun out of their hands.

Very true.
However, the silly part of the law is making locked gun storage mandatory, regardless of the presence of children.

 

[WinterBorn]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

Nice of you to be able to afford that. I guess poor people need to sod off then.

Eh, I didn't say it was a perfect solution. And you can get a biometric pistol safe for around $200 or so.

Here is one for $112.42.

GunVault GV1000C-STD Pistol Safe Mini Standard GV1000C-STD

Then you buy it, and let other people worry about their own houses.

Here's another exercise, if you care about them so much, agree to this: If someone dies because the government required them to have one of these and it failed, or caused them a delay that got them hurt, you suffer the exact same injury. Put your body where your keyboard is.

Lighten the fuck up. If you don't want a gun safe, don't buy one. But gov't entities are looking at requiring them. The legislation in the OP is a prime example. You can continue with the "the 2nd amendment says everyone can have any gun" mentality as the only response to any gun law discussion, or you can open up to dialogue about things that will actually help with both keeping children safe AND with lessening accidental shooting, while not interfering with self defense at all.

And if you would like to show where I have advocated requiring people use these biometric gun safes, you MIGHT have a point. But I didn't, so you don't.

 

[martybegan]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

Nice of you to be able to afford that. I guess poor people need to sod off then.

Eh, I didn't say it was a perfect solution. And you can get a biometric pistol safe for around $200 or so.

Here is one for $112.42.

GunVault GV1000C-STD Pistol Safe Mini Standard GV1000C-STD

Then you buy it, and let other people worry about their own houses.

Here's another exercise, if you care about them so much, agree to this: If someone dies because the government required them to have one of these and it failed, or caused them a delay that got them hurt, you suffer the exact same injury. Put your body where your keyboard is.

Lighten the fuck up. If you don't want a gun safe, don't buy one. But gov't entities are looking at requiring them. The legislation in the OP is a prime example. You can continue with the "the 2nd amendment says everyone can have any gun" mentality as the only response to any gun law discussion, or you can open up to dialogue about things that will actually help with both keeping children safe AND with lessening accidental shooting, while not interfering with self defense at all.

And if you would like to show where I have advocated requiring people use these biometric gun safes, you MIGHT have a point. But I didn't, so you don't.

if you are OK with government saying that people have to lock their guns up or face criminal charges, you are advocating it.

Again, if you are so confident these safes will work the way you say they do 100% of the time, man up.

 

[dannyboys]

No one is going to 'obey' any law requiring guns to be locked in safes. Like fucking nobody.
The retired/active duty cops aren't. The fucking criminals aren't. 99% of the kids killed accidentally by gun guns were in negro thug shit holes where the thugs leave loaded stolen handguns under every stinking mattress and cushion. Law abiding decent citizens who have gone through all the background checks keep their legal guns safe.
Just another stupid fucking LIB pussy who wants everyone to be undefended from criminal thugs.

 

[Alystyr]

No one is going to 'obey' any law requiring guns to be locked in safes. Like fucking nobody.
The retired/active duty cops aren't. The fucking criminals aren't. 99% of the kids killed accidentally by gun guns were in negro thug shit holes where the thugs leave loaded stolen handguns under every stinking mattress and cushion. Law abiding decent citizens who have gone through all the background checks keep their legal guns safe.
Just another stupid fucking LIB pussy who wants everyone to be undefended from criminal thugs.

I'd say that you're pretty much dead on.
However, I don't quite believe that it's because they want us to be "undefended from criminal thugs" so much as it's:
1) Appearing to be "doing something about the 'problem'" and trying to justify their own existence in office,
2) Adding another means to harass otherwise legal gun owners by enacting even more onerous restrictions , or
3) Both.

 

[WinterBorn]

There is a compromise that works. I have mine in a locked gunbox with a biometric lock. Access is almost instantaneous, and I can't forget a combination or lose a key.

Nice of you to be able to afford that. I guess poor people need to sod off then.

Eh, I didn't say it was a perfect solution. And you can get a biometric pistol safe for around $200 or so.

Here is one for $112.42.

GunVault GV1000C-STD Pistol Safe Mini Standard GV1000C-STD

Then you buy it, and let other people worry about their own houses.

Here's another exercise, if you care about them so much, agree to this: If someone dies because the government required them to have one of these and it failed, or caused them a delay that got them hurt, you suffer the exact same injury. Put your body where your keyboard is.

Lighten the fuck up. If you don't want a gun safe, don't buy one. But gov't entities are looking at requiring them. The legislation in the OP is a prime example. You can continue with the "the 2nd amendment says everyone can have any gun" mentality as the only response to any gun law discussion, or you can open up to dialogue about things that will actually help with both keeping children safe AND with lessening accidental shooting, while not interfering with self defense at all.

And if you would like to show where I have advocated requiring people use these biometric gun safes, you MIGHT have a point. But I didn't, so you don't.

if you are OK with government saying that people have to lock their guns up or face criminal charges, you are advocating it.

Again, if you are so confident these safes will work the way you say they do 100% of the time, man up.

I have no need to "man up". Once agains, please point out where I have said I am ok with the gov't requiring safe storage.

 

[martybegan]

Nice of you to be able to afford that. I guess poor people need to sod off then.

Eh, I didn't say it was a perfect solution. And you can get a biometric pistol safe for around $200 or so.

Here is one for $112.42.

GunVault GV1000C-STD Pistol Safe Mini Standard GV1000C-STD

Then you buy it, and let other people worry about their own houses.

Here's another exercise, if you care about them so much, agree to this: If someone dies because the government required them to have one of these and it failed, or caused them a delay that got them hurt, you suffer the exact same injury. Put your body where your keyboard is.

Lighten the fuck up. If you don't want a gun safe, don't buy one. But gov't entities are looking at requiring them. The legislation in the OP is a prime example. You can continue with the "the 2nd amendment says everyone can have any gun" mentality as the only response to any gun law discussion, or you can open up to dialogue about things that will actually help with both keeping children safe AND with lessening accidental shooting, while not interfering with self defense at all.

And if you would like to show where I have advocated requiring people use these biometric gun safes, you MIGHT have a point. But I didn't, so you don't.

if you are OK with government saying that people have to lock their guns up or face criminal charges, you are advocating it.

Again, if you are so confident these safes will work the way you say they do 100% of the time, man up.

I have no need to "man up". Once agains, please point out where I have said I am ok with the gov't requiring safe storage.

Your willingness to "compromise" on this is enough.

 

[WinterBorn]

Eh, I didn't say it was a perfect solution. And you can get a biometric pistol safe for around $200 or so.

Here is one for $112.42.

GunVault GV1000C-STD Pistol Safe Mini Standard GV1000C-STD

Then you buy it, and let other people worry about their own houses.

Here's another exercise, if you care about them so much, agree to this: If someone dies because the government required them to have one of these and it failed, or caused them a delay that got them hurt, you suffer the exact same injury. Put your body where your keyboard is.

Lighten the fuck up. If you don't want a gun safe, don't buy one. But gov't entities are looking at requiring them. The legislation in the OP is a prime example. You can continue with the "the 2nd amendment says everyone can have any gun" mentality as the only response to any gun law discussion, or you can open up to dialogue about things that will actually help with both keeping children safe AND with lessening accidental shooting, while not interfering with self defense at all.

And if you would like to show where I have advocated requiring people use these biometric gun safes, you MIGHT have a point. But I didn't, so you don't.

if you are OK with government saying that people have to lock their guns up or face criminal charges, you are advocating it.

Again, if you are so confident these safes will work the way you say they do 100% of the time, man up.

I have no need to "man up". Once agains, please point out where I have said I am ok with the gov't requiring safe storage.

Your willingness to "compromise" on this is enough.

Am I willing? I suggested a good compromise between guns being inaccessible and guns being left out unsecured.

You are just bound and determined to paint me as some sort of anti-gun nut who wants to hand over all our rights, aren't you?

If you want someone to "man up", why don't you man up and admit that you jumped in without paying attention.

 

[martybegan]

Then you buy it, and let other people worry about their own houses.

Here's another exercise, if you care about them so much, agree to this: If someone dies because the government required them to have one of these and it failed, or caused them a delay that got them hurt, you suffer the exact same injury. Put your body where your keyboard is.

Lighten the fuck up. If you don't want a gun safe, don't buy one. But gov't entities are looking at requiring them. The legislation in the OP is a prime example. You can continue with the "the 2nd amendment says everyone can have any gun" mentality as the only response to any gun law discussion, or you can open up to dialogue about things that will actually help with both keeping children safe AND with lessening accidental shooting, while not interfering with self defense at all.

And if you would like to show where I have advocated requiring people use these biometric gun safes, you MIGHT have a point. But I didn't, so you don't.

if you are OK with government saying that people have to lock their guns up or face criminal charges, you are advocating it.

Again, if you are so confident these safes will work the way you say they do 100% of the time, man up.

I have no need to "man up". Once agains, please point out where I have said I am ok with the gov't requiring safe storage.

Your willingness to "compromise" on this is enough.

Am I willing? I suggested a good compromise between guns being inaccessible and guns being left out unsecured.

You are just bound and determined to paint me as some sort of anti-gun nut who wants to hand over all our rights, aren't you?

If you want someone to "man up", why don't you man up and admit that you jumped in without paying attention.

Any compromise will be used to further whittle down gun rights. Considering I live in a state that already stops me from getting a CCW unless I "prove to NYPD I need it", I am not in a forgiving mood on any compromise whatsoever until I get MY rights back.