Letter: Securing firearms

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    March 28, 2014 8:22 a.m.

    To "JoeBlow" sounds just like a paranoid person.

    The fact is that my friends and I grew up in homes where we knew where our parents kept their guns. None of us touched them because we knew that guns were not toys.

    The NRA has nothing to do with it.

    My children are curious, but they also know that guns are not toys, and don't bother touching real guns.

    Here is the problem with putting the gun in a safe.

    What do you do if you have an intruder? Do you just tell the intruder to wait up while you open your safe? I can have a shot gun out and loaded in less than a minute. How about you?

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 27, 2014 4:36 p.m.

    Sounds just like an NRA response. Any solution that doesnt involve the gun. Or the gun owner.

    There are 2 issues.

    Some kids are young and curious. Some are a bit older but troubled.

    The best cure is to not give them the opportunity. Lock um up.

    I am quite confused as to why you or anyone else does not see the value and wisdom in securing the guns. It is beyond me.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    March 27, 2014 3:26 p.m.

    To "CHS 85" and "JoeBlow" and "Karen R." the solution is not more regulation on gun owners or more punishment. The solution is education. The parents have to deal with mixed messages that are sent to the kids each day. On one hand they are being told by the schools that gun are evil and even something that resembles a gun is evil. Then on Friday night they go and watch the latest action movie where guns are treated like toys and are glorified. So, the kids are curious about guns, so when they get the opportunity to handle the "forbidden fruit", they do so.

    If schools dropped their lame policies of not allowing anything that even remotely resembles a gun, even a poptart, on campus and simply taught kids that gun are tools, and that a real gun should be treated differently than a pretend or toy gun, you would demystify guns and kids wouldn't care if their parents kept a gun next to the sugar in the kitchen.

    I grew up in a house where we knew that real guns were not toys and to not touch them unless you were hunting or at the gun range.

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    March 27, 2014 9:44 a.m.

    According to KSL they were riding in a truck and the kid took the gun out of a holster.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    March 27, 2014 8:12 a.m.

    This turned into a pretty funny thread.

    You all are having a discussion about why you have guns in your home and how you secure them. Then along comes Redshirt, and starts with the "you liberals all want to disarm..." and you all fell for his rant by engaging him, when in fact no one had said anything at all about taking guns away.

    That's exactly why some of us engage here to call "foul" on the language, illogic, and falsehoods routinely told by the right.

    Come on don't let him get by with a false premise then proceed to spin a yarn based on it.

  • Karen R. Houston, TX
    March 27, 2014 7:56 a.m.

    A gun owner brings into his home a risk. He assumes this risk because he believes the benefit it provides - self-protection - outweighs the risk.

    To be a "responsible gun owner" and mitigate the risk to children, the gun owner is supposed to secure his weapon. Securing the weapon - either by locking it up or locking up the ammo - often precludes it from being readily available in the event that self-protection is necessary.

    So people either 1) don't secure their weapons, thereby increasing the risk of unintentional harm; or 2) secure them, thus rendering useless the gun's purported purpose.

    Guns don't make us safe. They make life - and us - more dangerous.

    @ airnaut - your first post:

    With all due respect, I think your rationale for being a gun owner surrenders to rather than fights the fear-mongering that feeds the paranoids you're arming yourself against. And all of this spells $$$ for the gun industry. This is now the true purpose of the NRA - the gun industry's marketing arm. I find it all grotesque and obscene.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 27, 2014 7:50 a.m.

    OK red.

    Dad keeps a loaded firearm in their dresser drawer.

    Dads 8 year old finds it and accidentally shoots and kills the neighbor boy.

    If this was your son who got killed, you would not see any culpability on neighbor dad?

    And BTW, "manly men" (did you really use that term? I'm still chuckling) who "know how to handle guns responsibly" keep them locked up. In my mind, that is what "responsibly" means.

    Lastly, your post is all over the map. Focus.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    March 27, 2014 7:16 a.m.

    How did this devolve into a gun owner's rights back and forth argument?

    Whether it is the parent's right or not is not the issue here. The issue is that the weapon was not secured properly.

    Would you allow your 9-year-old to have access to the car keys to take the car for a spin whenever they want? Do you let your 9-year-old use big knives and the stove unsupervised? Our job as parents is to protect our kids - even from themselves.

    This story is NOT a 2nd Amendment rights story.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 27, 2014 6:52 a.m.

    Deep Space 9, Ut

    You arguement is moot.
    You say it like only Liberals drink, do drugs, have abortions, or make movies with guns or violence.
    and Republicans don't.


    Meanwhile --
    Republicans have sent 1 million Americans to Afgahnistan and Iraq and killed 100's thousands with REAL guns and REAL weapons, not imanginary movies.

    You still don't get it.

    You never did answer the question --

    Why should I be held Liable for a child slipping and falling on my snow covered sidewalk,
    and NOT be held accountable for a child who gets shot by an unsecured gun?

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    March 26, 2014 3:57 p.m.

    To "JoeBlow" I was not commenting on the original letter, but on your ilk's response. You want to ban guns or else severly punish gun owners. Why stop there? Why not follow the Asian example and have people register knives over 6 inches long? If you are ready to put somebody in prison if another person gets injured with a gun, why not do the same for baseball bats or other objects that are used more frequently to injure or kill people?

    To "airnaut" let met get this straight. Liberals have been using scare tactics with our kids with respect to gun for decades. Meanwhile their Hollywood movie producers show actors using guns like toys. On top of all of that, liberals have been promoting a culture that devalues manly men who know how to handle guns responsibly. Now that you have nearly destroyed the possibility that a responsible man would have a gun, you complain that there are gun accidents?

    Do you also complain that after getting people drunk and encouraging them to drive that they get into accidents?

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    March 26, 2014 1:54 p.m.

    Let me get this straight "anything goes" pro-gun people --

    I leave alcohol out and children get hurt - I'm liable.
    I leave poison out and children get hurt - I'm liable.
    I leave sharp objects out and children get hurt - I'm liable.
    I don't shovel the snow off my sidewalks and children get hurt - I'm liable.

    I leave a gun out and children get hurt - I'm NOT liable?

    Do you see "anything" wrong with that?
    If not - am I truely feel sorry for you.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 26, 2014 1:40 p.m.

    Military Personel - Back ground Check, annually Trained and Certified.
    [personal weapons are banned on all military installations,
    all issued weapons locked and secured in the ARMORY].

    State and Local Police Force - Back ground Check, annually trained and cetrified.
    [personal weapons are banned, all issued weapons locked and secured in the ARMORY].

    Private Citizens?
    None of the above.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 26, 2014 1:08 p.m.

    Red, So, let me understand.

    The letter was about securing firearms in the home. So, are you against that?

    When knives and baseball bats become the go-to weapon of choice for homicide and suicide in the home, it may be necessary to address that. Until then, lets have adult conversations about real issues.

    And to your over-the-top conclusion, very few people (yes, there are some crazies out there) want to "disarm the populace". But it is much easier to argue against against banning guns than responsible ownership.

    And frankly, I could really care less what you do in your home. Until it affects others.

    Do you take the same approach to alcohol and second hand smoke?

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    March 26, 2014 12:53 p.m.

    Great letter, spot on. The NRA and some gun owners want to have their cake and eat it too. If you own a gun and don't secure it than you should be liable for the results. Personally, I choose to do the safest thing for my family and that is to not keep a firearm in the house. That's a fact supported by undeniable data. People who keep a firearm in the home are more likely to have one of their family become a victim of that weapon than they are to use it on an intruder.

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    March 26, 2014 12:29 p.m.

    Good letter but nothing but talk on the commentator end. When you pass laws to make it easier for a 12 year old to own a weapon without the proper training then don't preach about responsibility. All owners should be competent, responsible and legal and most here have fought to have it otherwise.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    March 26, 2014 12:23 p.m.

    Ok liberals, lets apply the same standards to all weapons that are typically used to kill.

    Do we now need to increase punishments for any accident involving a knife? Imagine your teenager cuts themselves with a knife and needs stiches. You are now charged with attempted homicide for letting them use it.

    Got that kid in little league. You better have a vault to store the bat in. We wouldn't want any harm coming from that.

    Why do you want to disarm the populace? For a group of people that complain about privacy so much, you sure are adamant about being involved in what I do in my home.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    March 26, 2014 12:14 p.m.

    My post has no suggestion as to who should or shouldn't be prosecuted, nor any suggestions for new laws, but can I at least presume that no one, including gun owners, wants preventable tragic violence?

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    March 26, 2014 11:45 a.m.

    The misuse of a right is punishable by law, e.g., Amendment 1 doesn't mean you can libel or slander people. A person who leaves a gun lying around for kids to shoot each other with is guilty of negligent homicide in my book. But the NRA will NEVER accede to such a law. That is my problem with the NRA.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    March 26, 2014 11:40 a.m.

    Mtn Tracker, my dad thought the same thing. I still sought them out, when left to my own devices.

    Locking them up was the only deterrent.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    March 26, 2014 11:34 a.m.

    Mark B
    Swimming pools can be and are covered. And supervision when young children are in lakes or rivers, or the ocean. Life vests. Should a supervisor of one of those who drown be held accountable for manslaughter if they weren't properly supervised?


    Might be the most convoluted post I've ever read.

  • Mtn Tracker Ephraim, UT
    March 26, 2014 10:52 a.m.

    Locking your guns away is not the only thing that should be done. Kids are curious by nature and love a good challenge. My parents couldn't hide or lock anything from me as a kid. I always found a way. Most of you know exactly what I mean. That being said, teach your kids about guns. Kill the curiosity not the kid. My own three kids have no desire to play with my guns. They've all held, handled, and shot them. They know what damage they can cause, and how dangerous they are. I keep them locked up especially at times when friends or family are over to play. The worst thing you can do is keep it hidden and tell them not to touch it. That's like showing candy and telling them they can't have any. Use common sense.

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    March 26, 2014 10:37 a.m.

    Well, if your kid shoots somebody with your gun then the police investigate how they got it. If we went with JoeBlows law the first time a parent is charged with multiple counts of murder because their kid shot up a school it would make you think. I know that my gun is either on my person or locked up in my safe, specifically because I don't want my daughter near it.
    I find it telling that you, and many other former military men and women I know are the most vocal anti war and anti gun people. It's like you've seen exactly how much damage these things can do so your more opposed than the masses who've never experienced it.

  • casual observer Salt Lake City, UT
    March 26, 2014 10:25 a.m.

    It's not that complex, really. With rights (gun ownership) come responsibilities (safe storage and use of firearms). They are inextricably linked and gun owners should realize that when you demonstrate your inability or unwillingness to meet your responsibilities, you lose your rights. Our laws should reflect that when one purchases a gun, for whatever purposes, they must accept the responsibility of owning a lethal weapon.

  • AZFarmBoy Goodyear, AZ
    March 26, 2014 10:16 a.m.

    A few questions for Mr Dorius:

    Specifically, what strict certifications would you suggest that would prevent these types of accidents? Some cities require that guns be locked away when they are not being carried. How would a law like this be enforced? Random home inspections? If it's not enforceable, how effective would it be?

    JoeBlow's suggestion is at least enforceable, and does not restrict gun rights.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    March 26, 2014 9:44 a.m.

    TB's 8:33 post is amazing to me. No, we can't cover or empty every body of water and, yes, accidental drownings will continue. But that's not the question here, because locking guns away from children isn't just smart, it's easy AND relatively cheap. Maybe TB has a good reason to oppose this, but he doesn't say what it is. I can't conceive of one. I have been posting the same thing for years - until they're "needed", keep your guns locked up!

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    March 26, 2014 8:41 a.m.

    I am about as anti-gun as they come.
    However, I own several guns myself.

    I agree with
    Far East USA, SC
    1,000 %
    "gun owners should be held criminally responsible when their unsecured weapons are used to cause harm"

    I also take responsibility and keep them in a gun safe.

    BTW --
    I am not a hypocrite.
    If anyone wants to know "Why" an antigun person has and keeps weapons,
    it's becasue I an ex-Military.

    And I do not trust the gun toting, vigilante, red-necks who think the mean old nasty Government is going to send tanks and aircraft in and take away their "Freedom".

    It is also in case of natural disasters, or the proper authorities of my country [in the form of County Sheriff, Governor, or President] calls me to take up arms.

    Most likely to restore law and order from the self-appointed, gun-toting, vigilante, red-necks who seek insurrection and over throw the Government.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    March 26, 2014 8:36 a.m.

    I agree with Joe.
    With the power comes the responsibility.
    Nearly every accidental gun death could be prevented.

    But, the NRA would fight this too, it has to be a free for all or it's not a right?

  • Thid Barker Victor, ID
    March 26, 2014 8:33 a.m.

    More children die from drowning than from firearm accidents. We would save more lives if we banned swimming pools, creeks, lakes and rivers!

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    March 26, 2014 7:40 a.m.

    I have an absolutely foolproof way to keep any child from accessing a gun in my home:

    I don't keep a gun in my home.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 26, 2014 4:57 a.m.

    I strongly believe in the 2nd Amendment. I also strongly believe that gun owners should be responsible to secure their weapons. And most do.

    But "stricter certifications" are not the answer to this problem.

    I would propose that "gun owners should be held criminally responsible when their unsecured weapons are used to cause harm"

    Someone breaks into their gun safe? No harm no foul. A 6 year old gets a loaded gun from the bedside table and someone dies? Gun owner = Negligent Homicide.