This Is Why You Don't Lock Up Your Guns

[mrjarrell]

There are any number of people who would say that guns should be locked away from kids, (rather than teaching them to be safe and responsible tool users). I would rather that kids be taught to treat self defence tools responsibly and have access to them when needed. Laws that have restricted access for juveniles have resulted in the murder of children by criminals and maniacs. Here we have a case where a responsible 11 year old protected his siblings and household from a bear. It sure was nice to see that the fish and game people responded appropriately, too. Kudos to them!

From the Standard Journal

An 11-year-old boy killed a bear at point-blank range last Wednesday night after it wouldn't leave his family's porch.

The boy was at his home near Driggs with his younger sisters and after seeing the bear on the front porch and not being able to get it to leave, the boy retrieved a gun and killed the animal.

The family declined to comment and wished to remain anonymous.

Fish and Game Conservation Officer Doug Petersen said the black bear had been a problem in the area near the county transfer station, and he and Fish and Game Officer Lauren Wednt had set up a trap earlier in the week.

"The bear had been hanging around and we got multiple complaint calls," said Wendt. The bear had been getting into garbage cans and bird feeders in the area.

Petersen said officials may have had to put it down anyway. He said that in situations where the bear has been a problem around humans or threatens human safety, they usually don't issue citations.

"Human safety is a higher priority," said Petersen. "We're concerned with how bears are managed and we want to live in harmony with them."

The boy and his family are not in any trouble, and Petersen said he issued them a permit to keep the bear. Usually when a bear is put down by Fish and Game they sell the hide at a state auction, Petersen said. Petersen said the family reported the bear Thursday morning. Fish and Game trapped and euthanized another problem black bear about two weeks ago, after the bear reportedly let himself into a home. Petersen said it's normal for the animals to move from higher elevations this time of year.

"We don't like to see them down this low," said Petersen. "But it's not uncommon."

Rachael Horne

Teton Valley News

 

[Indecision]

Bravo. I would still keep the guns locked up though. Just have one or two readily available.

 

[justincue]

Good for the kid. But would also keep the gun locked up.

 

[cubby]

you keep the guns locked up. period. the KEY is to give access to those who have shown a knowledge of safety, responsiblity, and maturity to handle a firearm.

you don't lock them up to keep them from responsible people. you keep them locked up so they don't get into the hands of those who they shouldn't (your kids friends, thieves, family members like your liberal uncle who comes over for christmas, ect.).

 

[alfahornet]

Kids should be taught how to handle them responsibly but in my book they should be looked up or not accessible to the kids. Your kid may be responsible but is his/her friend? Things start innocently and in the end

 

[bigg cheese]

Leave the gun out, seriously? The best thing the kid could have done is not be detected by it. 11-years old? I would never expect a kid that young to take down an animal like that? What if he had only pissed the bear off?

I'm thankful the kid's OK, but it was an un-wise move. It could have ended much differently. If it was threatening him, yeah try to kill it, but it evidently was just "hanging out" or some such thing.

 

[haldir]

I know that the PC thing is to keep all guns locked away and it probably is the best way for all of you that think it is. My Dad never kept them locked up. I raised my kids the same way. But we were all out shooting with them, when they were little. They knew that guns went boom and really tore things up. They never had any interest in touching them when they weren't supposed too. I am sure that had the same certainty though that I did when I was young. Mishandle a firearm and there would be sure and swift punishment. And no, it wasn't a time out either. Congrats to the young fellow. I am sure he will cherish that pelt for years to come.

 

[mskendall]

you keep the guns locked up. period. the KEY is to give access to those who have shown a knowledge of safety, responsiblity, and maturity to handle a firearm.

you don't lock them up to keep them from responsible people. you keep them locked up so they don't get into the hands of those who they shouldn't (your kids friends, thieves, family members like your liberal uncle who comes over for christmas, ect.).

Much agreed! I keep all firearms locked up besides 2. One of mine and one of my wife's which are kept on our person. Props to the 11 year old though!!

 

[IUGradStudent]

you keep the guns locked up. period. the KEY is to give access to those who have shown a knowledge of safety, responsiblity, and maturity to handle a firearm.

you don't lock them up to keep them from responsible people. you keep them locked up so they don't get into the hands of those who they shouldn't (your kids friends, thieves, family members like your liberal uncle who comes over for christmas, ect.).

This.

 

[tyrajam]

It sounds good to just trust kids to remember what you taught them and treat guns responsibly, but I'm not going to gamble with my kids life that they won't make a mistake. If my kids were 10 or 12, yes. But mine are 6, 4, and 1 1/2. They all know not to ever touch a gun, and my 6 year old daughter can load and unload a gun, but at this age the fact is I not going to bet their lives that they will obey.

 

[Walt_Jabsco]

Uh... Black bear, guys. That's like shooting your neighbors dog that wandered over.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Here in Indiana, we have the luxury of not having wild critters capable of killing people wandering the area on a regular basis. I understand the point of view of you who have said, "lock up the guns. period" or who have said that the adults in the house stay armed. I don't argue with your positions, though I do not agree with them; your house, your rules. I would ask you to consider different circumstances, however, such as where this family live. They see a bear because they live in his home. Bears have been known (even in this story) to open a front door and enter a house. Had all the guns been locked up or on adult belts, there is no telling what harm would have befallen the family.

Kathy Jackson of Cornered Cat said that she and her husband decided on a 2-layer method of keeping their kids safe. They kid-proofed the guns with a big wooden chest and trigger locks and ammo stored elsewhere, but they also gun-proofed the kids by removing the mystery. She tells a story about a time when a friend stopped by and was going to run everyone into town for something or other and the kids were in his car without an adult there. The friend had just come from the range. The kids promptly exited the car and came and got her.

The point? Just as you don't trust a manual safety more than the one between your ears, don't trust a metal safe more than the "safe" between your kids' ears.

Use the safe, but don't distrust your kids unless that kid has given you reason to distrust him/her.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[xamsx]

Wow, hopefully they make a nice souvenir rug out of him

 

[bw210]

Uh... Black bear, guys. That's like shooting your neighbors dog that wandered over.

 

[22lr]

Can I rain on the parade here. WHAT THE CRAP IS A 11 YEAR OLD DOING BABY SITTING.

Good job on his part, bad job on parents part.

 

[Mgderf]

I had my own .22Lr at age 11, and access to it. I had a 12 ga. by age 15 (that I paid for!) and had access to it.

No safe, no trigger locks, just kept the ammo out of access to the younger siblings.

We didn't even lock our doors!

 

[mrjarrell]

Can I rain on the parade here. WHAT THE CRAP IS A 11 YEAR OLD DOING BABY SITTING.

Good job on his part, bad job on parents part.

Maybe 11 is the new 16. Seriously, my siblings and I were left alone at that age. Maybe it's from coming from a different time, but 11 is old enough to be left alone or even to be watching over your younger siblings if you've been raised right. We even had access to the family firearms. No-one dead, no-one injured. Of course we didn't have bears in our neighbourhoods, either. If we did, I imagine the guns would have been bigger.

 

[DeadeyeChrista'sdad]

Well, I don't know bout you guys, but once Dad was sure I would be safe, I had access. Sis, not so much. I'm all for locking them up, but each parent has to decide at what point a kid is mature enough to have access to self protection. And, yes, like a lot of you, I was wandering the riverbanks south of Albany with a .22 at my own leisure and discretion before I was a teen. Dad made sure I felt the weight of the responsibility I carried then, and I still feel it now. Thanks Dad.




.

 

[hornadylnl]

Read this and see if you still think they should always be locked up.


When Gun Safety Locks Kill
by
Erich Pratt

It has been said that if you don't study history, you are doomed to repeat it.

That's why Americans should take note of a horrible tragedy that occurred one year ago this month in Merced, California. It is a tragedy that could have been prevented.

On the morning of August 23, 2000, Jonathon David Bruce was high on drugs. He slipped inside a home when the parents were away and began attacking the children inside.

Armed only with a pitchfork, and without a stitch of clothing on his body, Bruce proceeded to chase the children through the house -- stabbing them repeatedly.

The oldest of the children, Jessica Carpenter (14), was babysitting at the time. Having been trained by her father, Jessica knew how to use a firearm. There was just one problem: the household gun was locked up in compliance with California state law.

Because of California's "lock up your safety" law, Jessica had few options. She could not call 911 because the intruder had cut the phone lines to the house. She could not protect herself, for state officials had effectively removed that possibility. Her only option was to flee the house and leave her siblings behind.

Thankfully, Mr. Bruce's murderous rampage was finally cut short when police officers arrived at the house. They shot and killed Bruce, but not before two children had already been murdered.

Now, notice when the attack ended. It screeched to a halt when the good guys -- carrying guns -- showed up on the scene.

Which has made many wonder: could Jessica have protected her brother and sister if the state law had not prevented her from doing so?

Well, the family seems to think so. After the murders, Jessica's uncle, Rev. John Hilton, blasted California legislators for having scared the father into hiding the gun where Jessica, who was trained in the use of firearms, could not get it.

"If only [Jessica] had a gun available to her," said Rev. Hilton, "she could have stopped the whole thing. If she had been properly armed, she could have stopped him in his tracks."

Of course, that kind of talk sends gun haters into orbit. "Hold on," they say. "Kids shouldn't have access to guns. And you can't expect a 14-year-old to handle a weapon in a responsible fashion during a high-pressure encounter like that."

Oh really? Tell that to the 12-year-old Mississippi girl who used a gun to save her mother's life this past April.

The girl's mother was being choked in her own apartment by Anthony Fox, a 25-year-old man who had forced his way into the apartment. The cries for help woke up the daughter who grabbed her mother's handgun and shot Fox in the chest.

One shot. One dead killer. A 12-year-old saves the day.

Prosecutors ruled the shooting a case of justifiable self-defense.

Which brings us back to Jessica. She could very well have saved the lives of her two siblings. If she had access to her father's gun to save those children's lives, would that have been wrong?

For that matter, was it wrong for the 12-year-old girl in Mississippi to have access to her mother's handgun in order to prevent a murder?

In California, the answer to these questions is: "Yes, it is always wrong for anyone to have immediate access to a firearm, even when it's to save the life of a family member."

Governor Gray Davis just signed a bill last month putting more "teeth" into California's original gun storage law. Under the new legislation, parents face additional criminal penalties if they refuse to lock up their best means of self-defense.

Many legislators -- both at the state level and in Washington, D.C. -- seem to think they know what's best for each family in every situation.

Parents are told they need to put trigger locks on their guns. Or that they must store their ammunition separately from their firearms. Or that they must store the weapons in a safe.

But many times, locking up your safety in any of those ways can be deadly. Americans use guns almost 50,000 times every week to defend themselves or others. And in most of those situations, a trigger lock would give criminals the advantage.

Consider a case from March of this year, where a trigger lock would have cost the life of homeowner, Chuck Harris.

After being repeatedly stabbed by three young men in his Colorado home, Harris managed to grab the .44-Magnum pistol he kept in a desk drawer. Thankfully, Harris didn't have to remember a combination or fiddle with a trigger lock -- he just pointed the gun and fired.

That quick thinking saved his life, and has caused Harris to later reflect upon what was, perhaps, the obvious.

"If I'd had a trigger lock, I'd be dead," he said. "If my pistol had been in a gun safe, I'd be dead. If the bullets were stored separate, I'd be dead. They were going to kill me."

Which raises a very important question: when it comes to life or death issues, who is best suited to make choices for you? You, or some faceless bureaucrat who is hundreds of miles away, impotent to rush to your aid? You, or the politicians in the U.S. Congress?

It would, perhaps, help to know how those bureaucrats and politicians answer that question for themselves. They are not left unprotected. They have security officers nearby who are carrying guns.

And no, those guns don't have trigger locks on them.

Erich Pratt is the Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America.

8/01 When Gun Safety Locks Kill

 

[snojet]

Well put in your post "honadylnl". I have been wrestling with this very question for years. I've done both, with and without gun locks. I can see the value in both arguments. I wish everyone success in your decision - one way or the other. Good subject matter here.