General Categories > Laws and Legislation

Coalition wants safe gun storage ordinance in Lincoln

(1/3) > >>

ILoveCats:
Here is the google cached version of the Lincoln Urinal Star article, because the Urinal is almost entirely behind a paywall now, because they’re bleeding money, because they are a paper by nut job hippies, for nut job hippies.

But I digress.

Safe storage is a good thing of course, but the problem is rarely just access. It’s access combined with liberals trying (and failing) to parent. If everyone followed the tenants set forth in Ayoob’s parenting primer, “Gun-Proof Your Children,” 99.9% of accidental shootings etc would not occur.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mRo39ovwthIJ:https://journalstar.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/coalition-wants-safe-gun-storage-ordinance-in-lincoln/article_4ad6d823-520b-5314-9a8b-9fbfb124e768.html+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari

RobertH:
I remember Ashford submitted a bill requiring this in the state legislure..... Not a single proponent. It was in response to an OPD cops kid or something.

Just another way to restrict your right to self defense. Remember, they know no bounds on restrictions and want to eliminate personal responsibility.

Les:
Safe storage is a good thing of course, but the problem is rarely just access. It’s access combined with liberals trying (and failing) to parent. If everyone followed the tenants set forth in Ayoob’s parenting primer, “Gun-Proof Your Children,” 99.9% of accidental shootings etc would not occur.



Absolutely, take the mystery away. 

Jito463:
Sheesh, even with the archived version, I still had to click the "text only" version to read it.  It kept detecting Adblock Plus and was kicking me off the article.  In any event, I'm going to make it a point to get off work early so I can be at that council meeting.

GreyGeek:

--- Quote ---She also has been contacted by people caring for aging parents with guns in the home, she said.   The parent might have no business owning a firearm, but unless the person is declared mentally incompetent, there's no way to keep them away from firearms.
--- End quote ---

"might have no business owning a firearm"?    Say's who, and with what authority that would override the 2nd Amendment? 

https://nypost.com/2017/11/30/video-captures-thugs-vicious-attack-on-elderly-man/

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/thug-brutally-knocks-elderly-man-11436469

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2018/02/12/elderly-woman-unprovoked-attack/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/12/02/protests-sparse-after-pack-hammer-wielding-teens-beats-man-to-death-in-shadow.html


--- Quote ---"But the city hasn't asked gun owners to do their part by keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them,” she said.
--- End quote ---

And why should they?  There are enough laws on the books that infringe the 2nd Amendment.  And, why do all the laws punish the lawful gun owners?  Because that's the purpose of these types of proposals.  Every infringement is always called "reasonable".

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page