07-01-2015, 12:50 AM
(07-01-2015, 12:25 AM)Cutz Wrote: I'm also discussing guns in the gun thread. My point is that they're a tool. They shoot bullets, not people. Just like abrasive chemicals are designed to be abrasive chemicals and knives are designed to be sharp. Whether you choose to shoot targets, beer cans, neighbors, escaped convicts, or nothing is your choice. It's perfectly valid to say that the inherent risk in the tool is too high. Unfortunately, it's then subject to comparison to the risk of other tools, whether people like it or not.
I understand your points and comparisons, they've just been brought up, acknowledged, and addressed many times. Which is fine.
I was addressing the specific problem of adults leaving loaded guns in reach of toddlers, leading to injury and death.
Aside from not wanting another law and considering the dead toddlers no real loss because of Darwin and all, is there a reason why you would object to a law or regulation requiring adults to practice guns safety with children on the premises?
I mean, it certainly wouldn't infringe on anybody's 2nd amendment right to bear tools. If locks were provided free, it wouldn't add any financial burden to gun owners. And, it wouldn't affect responsible guns owners at all because they don't keep loaded guns in reach of toddlers anyway. So, why not?
As I posted to F.U., if there's a better solution, incentive or whatever, which doesn't involve a new law/regulation and accomplishes the same goal (ideally without burden to the tax payers), I'm all for it. Spill it if you've got it.