A "common sense" proposal that will piss off both sides

[jt13]

It is unsafe to lean a firearm against a vehicle loaded or unloaded. In Pa it is illegal to do so loaded or unloaded.

It's only illegal if it's loaded

Edit: "loaded" includes attached magazines or chamber

 

[88man]

The specific context was I had my shotgun sitting stock out, like 75% into my trunk, unloaded while I was putting stuff in my pack. The guy next to me was like… don’t do that keep it cased until the very last second, and told me about the leaning thing. In MA it’s not a “safety” law like leaning is dangerous because it could fall over it’s an “under your direct control law”. I can almost guarantee you that no criminal has gotten their hands on a shotgun because some hunter had it sitting next to them on the backseat and they sprinted up and grabbed it.

I get the safety issue, but IMHO that law is far more intrusive/ripe for abuse personally I’d be fighting that one more than background checks.

Basically Joe Pickett would be f-ed in MA.

you know what the Vermonters say about the guys from Mass

 

[Deleted member 28227]

you know what the Vermonters say about the guys from Mass

Well they’re a bunch of commies

 

[antelopedundee]

This is a good question. I guess we have too many people that like to drink and don't feel it is important enough to address. Within the last week there was a prominent senator's husband get a dui. Worth over $100 million and 82 years old. Would think he might be able to at least afford a night time driver.

If he or another drunk driver had driven into a crowd and killed 21 or 32 people in one fell swoop it would be a big deal. One person here or one person there kind of dilutes it down.

 

[longbow51]

What did you folks think of Matthew M's speech? Lots of points we have hit on, and unlike some here, and almost all in Congress, he covered the broad spectrum, in other words, "all of the above".

He even called, I think, at least that's how I interpreted it, for penalties for abuse of red flag laws. That would have to be carefully written, and, I would think likely unenforceable. Kind of a he said she said.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Interesting news from Wyoming.

Wyoming GOP Sen. Cynthia Lummis 'surprised' by constituents urging action on guns

theweek.com

 

[woods89]

If he or another drunk driver had driven into a crowd and killed 21 or 32 people in one fell swoop it would be a big deal. One person here or one person there kind of dilutes it down.

While I get what your saying from a perception standpoint, isn't it a little illogical to say that one death every 45 minutes doesn't matter as much because it's not large numbers at one time?

 

[Bigjay73]

The argument that XYZ kills more people than guns is only, and will only ever be relevant to people in favor of little to no gun legislation.

 

[88man]

The argument that XYZ kills more people than guns is only, and will only ever be relevant to people in favor of little to no gun legislation.

Maybe so but what about the folks who have experience with issues that kill or take more lives than illegal use of guns and don't understand why the issue to them is not on the news or a political talking point with all kinds of opportunity for action.
Im sure since the shooting there has been more non gun suicides or Overdose deaths. Its a political talk point.....

 

[LWC55]

The argument that XYZ kills more people than guns is only, and will only ever be relevant to people in favor of little to no gun legislation.

So only relevant the literate - "shall not be infringed".

My apologies. I could not help myself .

 

[Bigjay73]

Maybe so but what about the folks who have experience with issues that kill or take more lives than illegal use of guns and don't understand why the issue to them is not on the news or a political talking point with all kinds of opportunity for action.
Im sure since the shooting there has been more non gun suicides or Overdose deaths. Its a political talk point.....

I cannot argue that. Many reasons why gun deaths take front and center, doesn't make sense, but such is our society.

 

[antelopedundee]

While I get what your saying from a perception standpoint, isn't it a little illogical to say that one death every 45 minutes doesn't matter as much because it's not large numbers at one time?

I'm not saying that they matter less, but unless it's highly unusual you never hear about them except for maybe local news. A hit and run [alcohol involved or not] makes the local news, but that's about it so you never really know the extent of the problem.

Then again as some put it "people die every day" from a variety of causes. At least 50,000 or more people die annually from prescription drugs, but I can't remember ever hearing about it in the news or other places.

 

[88man]

Where are the statistics on how many lives are saved by the use or perceived protection of legal firearm possession. I have a hard time believing violent gun deaths would not go DOWN!!! If legal carry was allowed. I think they would think twice if they had to deal with more armed carry of the target

 

[VikingsGuy]

The argument that XYZ kills more people than guns is only, and will only ever be relevant to people in favor of little to no gun legislation.

Yup - because the simple answer is - "OK, let's do both - ban ARs and put breathalyzers on cars. Since AR ban will cost less and affects fewer law-abiding citizens, let's start there."

[Again, for the thousandth time on HT - I do not support a ban on ARs]

 

[KB_]

Yup - because the simple answer is - "OK, let's do both - ban ARs and put breathalyzers on cars. Since AR ban will cost less and affects fewer law-abiding citizens, let's start there."

[Again, for the thousandth time on HT - I do not support a ban on ARs]

I think maybe you just un intentionally struck a cord with some people. Easy to get defensive when you bring up hard questions.

I even think some of these counter arguments are good. Its a good discussion to have. You think congress is this reasonable? lol probably not.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Aren’t integrated breathalyzers a thing the auto industry is working on for production vehicles? Seems like I remember reading an article about it recently, but I may be mistaken. There are several versions of self driving cars in existence, with the end goal to mitigate accidents due to driver error. And lane assist. And auto braking. The auto industry had been trending towards developing technology to reduce traffic deaths for quite a while. We just never hear about it in the news, I suppose because it does not inflame the public like guns do. So it seems like there actually are things in the works to reduce deaths due to XYZ other causes even though we don’t hear about them on the news necessarily. I’m not sure how much water that argument really holds I guess.

 

[Nick87]

I suppose because it does not inflame the public like guns do.

I'm thinking because a political party can't use it to attract votes. Ymmv

 

[Hunting Wife]

I'm thinking because a political party can't use it to attract votes. Ymmv

That too.

 

[woods89]

Some good discussion here. In full disclosure, I do enjoy playing Devils advocate sometimes, and I don't necessarily feel that nothing should be done about gun violence because more people die in impaired driving accidents. It is hard for me to accept someone's credibility when they go full on emotional over certain things in the name of saving lives but don't really care about other similarly dangerous problems.

I do think it's absolutely appropriate to be horrified over school shootings.

A few years ago a car hydroplaned, lost control, and ran off the road right in front of me. I pulled over and spent the next few minutes getting 3 little girls out of the backseat. Thankfully, all were in car seats, and were fine, but maybe that's why car accidents immediately come to mind for me. I've thought about that evening more than a few times, and imagined how horrible it would have been if they had been seriously hurt or killed. I don't think it would have been less tragic than had they been shot at school.

I'm probably guilty of a bit a a thread derail here. Back on topic......

 

[VikingsGuy]

I'm thinking because a political party can't use it to attract votes. Ymmv

Now - but I recall the mandatory seatbelt wars in ND that ended up fairly partisan. MN indoor public building smoking ban got partisan too. Whenever the pols can find an issue to get out the vote or bring in $$ they will make it partisan and ride it to death.