The second someone puts the words common sense in front of gun laws, we can be sure common sense has nothing to do with the anti-gun activists’ version of one of the many new laws they’re flinging about to see if they will stick.
Regardless, these laws usually work in the same ways: the law either reduces the effectiveness of their firearms (i.e. bans on “high-capacity” magazines) or the law reduces the ability of gun owners to use their firearms for self-defense (i.e. “safe” gun storage laws). The latter keeps guns out of the hands of law-abiding gun owners when they need them most.
I wonder if people who support supposed safe gun storage laws, which are proliferating in states across the country and even at the federal level, truly consider whom it is they’re actually making “safe.”
They should think about many diverse firearm defense scenarios, but I think most consider only a few neatly packaged situations that suit their narrative, mostly involving kids and crooks. Of course, children’s safety and criminals accessing guns are valid concerns, but what about the safety of homeowners and their families?
NRATV.com has a recent video that perfectly illustrates the issue with a frightening real-life example of how safe gun storage laws may make criminals “safe.” But not so safe for homeowners. If storage proponents are serious about safety, shouldn’t they consider the safety of homeowners against armed intruders?
In the video, it’s the middle of the night, and a homeowner is awakened when three armed robbers kick down his front door. The groggy homeowner has about four seconds from the sound of the front door imploding to when the bad guy turns the corner into his bedroom.
Fortunately, for this homeowner, four seconds was enough time to arm himself. Even then, one of the bad guys still shot him in the hand. The homeowner returned fire, causing the three criminals to bolt out the front door like scattering cockroaches. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear any of the cockroaches was shot.
Keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them is a legitimate concern. But in a free country, keeping guns in the hands of law-abiding individuals is also a legitimate concern—and a constitutional right. People should decide for themselves how they will secure their weapons in a way that works best for them. I don’t want leftist activists and politicians bent on restricting my right to self-defense deciding that for me.
In the above incident, if the man had a trigger lock on his gun (as former Vice President Joe Biden recently admonished us we had an obligation to do) or if he’d have locked it in a storage box or safe, the home invasion robbers may have killed him.
Or let’s say the homeowner had a biometric (fingerprint) gun safe next to his bed, even that small two-second (for someone who’s practiced, longer for someone who hasn’t) delay in opening the safe before he could get the gun in his hand could be the difference between living and dying. It appears the homeowner in the video had only enough time to pick up the gun and shoot.
While discussing the video, NRA TV host Grant Stinchfield interviews former Army Green Beret Jeff Houston. Both men granted that a biometric gun safe next to the bed was the best option for being able to access a secured firearm. They also both agreed there was still a delay of at least two seconds, and that’s for someone who practices.
When you have only four seconds before three bad guys with guns enter your bedroom, you don’t have two seconds to spare. When you mention this to gun storage law proponents, they often scoff, like that’s gonna happen. Well, a home-invasion happened to the man in the video. And home invasions happened to many people while I was on the job.
It seems, in the eyes of many gun-grabbers, just owning a firearm makes a person sub-human. The concerns of gun owners are not worthy of being considered when discussing safety issues. That’s because the leftist gun law advocates don’t care most about safety; they care most about taking guns away.
