The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 6, 2018, 01:00 AM   #26
cjwils
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2010
Location: Washington state
Posts: 301
"...along with that came being taught responsibility, and that we WOULD NOT touch a firearm without parental (or grandparental) permission. That's just the way it was, and the adults didn't need gun safes or trigger locks to enforce it."

That is also what I was taught, and yet I touched the guns anyway when no adults were around. That was back in the 1950s and 60s, and I sure many kids today would do the same. Lock up the guns if kids will be around, because you can never be sure what they will do.
cjwils is offline  
Old February 6, 2018, 01:04 AM   #27
Sure Shot Mc Gee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,483
There is no forgiveness: when guns are involved.
"Out of sight out of mind." Unless [you] open pandora's box and allow your children a look see before their matured enough to understand. Guns are serious killing tools.
Buy a decent gun safe. Liberty brand is about the best you can buy that I know of. With Liberty a few safe models can be ordered with a Mechanical dial verses a battery energized soft touch pad.
__________________
"JUST A OLD DEPLORABLE THAT'S IRREDEMABLE."
Sure Shot Mc Gee is offline  
Old February 6, 2018, 11:44 AM   #28
jamaica
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 24, 2006
Location: Northern Utah
Posts: 705
My father had two rifles. A 22 and a 30-30. They hung on the wall up high. That is where they resided. I was taught about guns from an early age. I got my own first gun at age 6, a BB gun. I got instruction along with the gun. Only one time did I get my butt kicked for doing something stupid with the gun. When I reached age 12 Dad told me I could get down the 22 and go hunt if I wanted. When I reached age 16 I bought a deer license. Well we only had one riding horse, so opening day of deer season we both get on the horse, with the one rifle and head up the canyon. Well a nice deer got up and I jumped off the horse. Dad handed me the rifle and said, "Shoot it! Pull a fine bead." So I did. Killed a deer with my first shot with that ol 30-30. It was a Winchester 94 with a long barrel.
jamaica is offline  
Old February 6, 2018, 12:00 PM   #29
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,835
Quote:
But I grew up in an age when parents spanked their children for sassing and disobeying. Today, the kids would call the cops and have Mommy or Daddy arrested for child abuse over what was routine discipline when I was young. I find it difficult to think that the modern system produces better adult citizen
Amen to that, and 100% right on point.
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA NROI Range Officer,
ICORE Range Officer,
,MAG 40 Graduate
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old February 6, 2018, 12:36 PM   #30
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,637
All the guns in my house are either in a very secure "gun" style safe with a mechanical dial or in quick access safes and out of sight. Aside from my carry gun these are all sitting with the action open and the clips in the safe next to them. I may sleep in various bedrooms depending on how my children are doing and how closely they need monitored at night so that necessitates multiple quick access safes. The quick access safes are out of sight and I doubt the kids know they are there. They are secured into place because if they find them I do not want them to be able to pull them out to "work" on later.

Seems to work well for my 3 and 4 year old and I don't think my 18 year old is even aware there are guns outside of the main safe even though is well versed in handling and gun safety.

I assume all guns are loaded. Storing guns and ammunition separately and assuming it works seems to me to be ignoring one of the fundamental tenants of gun safety (all guns are loaded). If I could not afford a safe they would have cable locks through any not in my immediate possession. Cable locks can be had around here at any police station and I would bet any gun manufacturer would send you a couple if you asked.
Lohman446 is offline  
Old February 6, 2018, 02:19 PM   #31
manta49
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,721
Quote:
Don't put words in my mouth. I am certainly in favor of keeping children safe. What I am not in favor of is insulating them from exposure to firearms, and treating them in ways that don't teach them that they are, ultimately, responsible for their actions. Yes, until children reach the legal age of adulthood the parents are legally liable for what their children do, but that should not absolve the children of learning to be responsible human beings.
I still don't see how any of my posts were in any way anti gun.
manta49 is offline  
Old February 6, 2018, 02:42 PM   #32
fredvon4
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2010
Location: Lampasas Texas
Posts: 154
We can all relate to how we were brought up and in the same breath lament how children today are

The kiddos did not change... society and parental control, or lack of, did

We were quite comfortable in the 80s with our 3 to 11 YO children taught well by us
BUT! All children learn to explore and push limits...

Soldier Wife and I knew this because, as teenagers, we did.. and from what I know this is typical of all children advancing and exploring their world

Knowing that--- we took steps to mitigate the risks of live weapons accessible to them or cohorts.... as they entered their defiant teens

All the while trying to keep a reasonable home and personal defense posture

Point is---- no matter how well behaved and well trained your kids are...there is risk and there are age ranges where you simply must remove the dangerous item from their unsupervised access
fredvon4 is offline  
Old February 6, 2018, 04:20 PM   #33
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,637
I know of multiple teenagers recently who have used an unsecured firearm in the home to commit suicide. The parents, in these cases, had more defensible reasons than most to have firearms readily accessible due to their line of work.

It made me reconsider accessibility of firearms even with teenagers who are familiar with their safe handling.
Lohman446 is offline  
Old February 6, 2018, 04:55 PM   #34
TailGator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,349
I would welcome Dr. Myer's comments on this, but my understanding is that there are demonstrable deficiencies in reasoning, recognition of consequences, and planning abilities in the immature brain. I am all for teaching kids firearm safety, and for satisfying their curiosity, but doing that instead of securing firearms, as opposed to in addition to securing firearms, didn't happen at my house when I had kids, and it won't happen as my granddaughter gets older, either. (Even if she is the smartest kid ever, in the eyes of her totally rational and unbiased grampa.)
TailGator is offline  
Old February 8, 2018, 11:50 PM   #35
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,553
A neighbor lost a son at the tender age of 8 when a child visiting them found a revolver, pointed it at Jimmy and pulled the trigger. Kid died at the hospital. All of the "shoulda....coulda....woulda" baloney means nothing in this instance. We keep our guns locked up. Period. Our grand daughters come over and explore every inch of the house. But they can't get to the guns. We aren't antigun. We're anti stupid.
Colorado Redneck is offline  
Old February 9, 2018, 12:18 PM   #36
Don Fischer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 1,079
I have always felt that the best way to keep kids out of trouble with gun's is allow them access whit me there all the time. Kid want's to see a gun, sure, and then go through all the safety rules. Remove the curiosity, remove the danger.

I think the best reason for a locking cabnet is to keep anyone that breaks in away from the guns. But then my older brother did that and the guy that broke in got in the safe and took every gun he had.

We spend far to much time hiding thing's from kids and not enough time teaching them how to use them.
Don Fischer is offline  
Old February 9, 2018, 12:38 PM   #37
Marco Califo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2011
Location: LA
Posts: 1,482
Wow! Some people just like to argue! AND have time to.
I store kids away from my guns.
I have a legally required locking safe. I have a lock box, mainly for my car, but only if need for work. I do keep a loaded Glock 26 in a hidden bedroom drawer.
Add kids and I would actually scrub the house for all hazards. The G26 would be secured then.
Kids with guns are bad news. I worry more about my neighborhood juveniles in general.
__________________
........................................................
Marco Califo is offline  
Old February 9, 2018, 02:37 PM   #38
manta49
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,721
Quote:
I have always felt that the best way to keep kids out of trouble with gun's is allow them access whit me there all the time. Kid want's to see a gun, sure, and then go through all the safety rules. Remove the curiosity, remove the danger.
Do all kids act and think the same obviously not, so what might work for some will not work for others. The only way to be sure, is make sure they can not have unsupervised access to firearms. We should not be having this discussion its a no brainer for me, responsible firearms owners do not allow children anywhere near firearms without supervision. No different to any other potentially dangerous item / substance.
manta49 is offline  
Old February 9, 2018, 04:35 PM   #39
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 19,320
We have discussed this before. One's statement that you lectured your kids and nothing bad happened is not real evidence that this will always work.

Denying access unless supervised is much more secure. We know that kids today face tremendous social pressures leading to conformist, dangerous behavior. They are faced with demands that might lead to suicidal ideation. Substance abuse is common.

Good kids (who have been good for years) all of a sudden can face a social, personal crisis and your 'gun talk' goes down the drain. There is more to gun misuse that curious exploration of the unsecured firearm.

Manta49 is on the money. It is sometimes the case that more a parent in patriarchal mode and sure of his kid because of the lecture, the more likely the kid has a secret life.

A case in point from another domain, that I know of and mention in these discussions. A good kid - church, scouts, good grades, no girl problems, graduates HS with honors. His dad is a car nut with a hobby car - Chevy Chevelle SS 496. Babies the car, has a thousand coats of paint, wax, blah, blah. The kid is not allowed to drive it. After graduation, he asks Dad if he can take if for a spin. Dad says he can, only around the block, no friends, don't speed. They later find him DRT, wrapped around a pole with a car full of male friends. He hit at 100 mph.

Good kid - got the lecture.

Now, the flip side brought up is that some good kid saved the day with the family gun when the family gunfighter wasn't there or taken out of the fight. You can find cases so how to you balance it?

My point is that it is complex and you have to figure this out. Locking is probably the best way. You can't trust curiosity control and your patriarchal lectures.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old February 9, 2018, 05:56 PM   #40
FAS1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 9, 2010
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 433
My own experience is with my two boys. They are both good kids, grown with families of their own now.

One you could just tell him something once and he never questioned it. The other, my oldest always challenged your answer or at least questioned it. When he was about 10 or 12 he found the one gun that I didn't keep locked up. It was in the garage hidden in my toolbox. At this age they really started tinkering with things and I just didn't think about it.

I found out he showed it to a friend of his and that made me realize how fast something can happen. I was reloading in the garage when his friend came by on his bike looking for my son. He asked what I was doing and when I told him he said "I know where your gun is" and pointed to my toolbox.

My son knew guns and was educated on how to handle them even though he didn't show much interest at that age. My first thought was what would have happened if his friend said; "Cool" and grabbed it. That's when I decided that education is not enough and locked that one up too.

That really led me to developing my idea of a quick access safe and I am very thankful that nothing happened that day to my son or his friend.
__________________
Glenn
FAS1 SAFE
FAS1 is offline  
Old February 9, 2018, 07:28 PM   #41
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,637
In the training forum of this site some individuals routinely talk about risk to reward ratio. You don’t carry a gun because you know the statistics indicate you will never be the victim of a violent crime. You don’t carry a spare magazine because you think you will need it

Are we really going to reverse the risk analysis to justify not storing firearms securely. Millions of guns have been stored in unsafe manners without incident. Still is the risk worth it?
Lohman446 is offline  
Old February 10, 2018, 11:55 AM   #42
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 19,320
That makes no sense at all.

If you don't carry and are a crime victim, you made yourself a victim. Tough luck for you.

If you don't secure the gun and a child kills themselves and/or shoots another, you were causal to the pain and suffering that ensued for others.

Please leave your unsecured gun on the kitchen table, along with all you prescription medicines in candy dishes.

You really don't understand squat about risk analysis.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old February 10, 2018, 03:32 PM   #43
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,803
Quote:
In the training forum of this site some individuals routinely talk about risk to reward ratio.

You don’t carry a gun because you know the statistics indicate you will never be the victim of a violent crime.

You don’t carry a spare magazine because you think you will need it

Are we really going to reverse the risk analysis to justify not storing firearms securely.

Millions of guns have been stored in unsafe manners without incident.

Still is the risk worth it?
Six sentences, seemingly unrelated, that say little or nothing.

Is there a point?
OldMarksman is offline  
Old February 10, 2018, 03:39 PM   #44
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca
You are conflating liability with responsibility. Nevertheless, your anti-gun bias is showing (again). You live in an anti-gun society, so you aren't really qualified to understand the nuances of how it works here in the U.S.
Let's look at the question of legal liability here in the U. S.

With regard to possible criminal liability, many States have "safe storage" laws. These laws generally provide that if a child gets ahold of your loaded gun and hurts someone with it, you can be prosecuted. Exactly what you might be prosecuted for and what your defenses might be vary somewhat from State-to-State. However, most such laws do provide some sort of "safe harbor", e. g., if the gun was locked up in a suitable safe you'll be off the hook.

The issue of possible civil liability is more complicated.

If gets ahold of your gun and hurts someone with it any liability you might have will generally be based on negligence. Negligence in law is basically:
Quote:
A failure to behave with the level of care that someone of ordinary prudence would have exercised under the same circumstances. The behavior usually consists of actions, but can also consist of omissions when there is some duty to act (e.g., a duty to help victims of one's previous conduct).
Negligence is generally a question for a jury. Basically the jury will need to decide, after all the evidence about what took place and what everyone said or did is presented whether the defendant acted as a reasonable and prudent person would in the same situation.

So --
  1. In general, everyone has a legal duty to exercise due care to avoid reasonably foreseeable injury to others. If one is found not to have done so and thus caused damage to another, he could be required to compensate the injured person for that damage.

  2. A gun is a potentially dangerous instrumentality. If someone stores his gun in a manner in which it is foreseeable that it can be accessed by an unauthorized person, such as one's child, and such person gets the gun and hurts someone, under some circumstances a jury might decide that the gun owner failed to exercise appropriate care and may be held financially liable.

  3. And if the gun owner's conduct was so careless as to be considered reckless, he could also face criminal charges.

  4. These sorts of results are highly circumstance dependent. Whether there can be liability will be a matter of exactly what happened and how.

  5. Consider this case from gun-friendly Montana, Estate of Strever v. Cline, 278 Mont. 165 (Mont., 1995), at 174 -- 175 (emphasis added):
    Quote:
    ...A firearm, particularly one that is loaded or has ammunition in close proximity, is considered a dangerous instrumentality and therefore requires a higher degree of care in its use or handling. This concept is set out in the Restatement (Second) of Torts, which provides:

    Care required. The care required is always reasonable care. This standard never varies, but the care which it is reasonable to require of the actor varies with the danger involved in his act, and is proportionate to it. The greater the danger, the greater the care which must be exercised.

    As in all cases where the reasonable character of the actor's conduct is in question, its utility is to be weighed against the magnitude of the risk which it involves. [Citation omitted.] The amount of attention and caution required varies with the magnitude of the harm likely to be done if care is not exercised, and with the utility of the act. Therefore, if the act has little or no social value and is likely to cause any serious harm, it is reasonable to require close attention and caution. So too, if the act involves a risk of death or serious bodily harm, and particularly if it is capable of causing such results to a number of persons, the highest attention and caution are required even if the act has a very considerable utility. Thus those who deal with firearms ... are required to exercise the closest attention and the most careful precautions, not only in preparing for their use but in using them....

    Restatement (Second) of Torts § 298 cmt. b (1965).

    Accordingly, given the foreseeability of the risk involved in the improper and unsafe use and storage of a firearm; given the strong policy considerations favoring safe and prudent use and storage; and on the basis of the law as set forth in §§ 1-1-204, 27-1-701 and 28-1-201, MCA, our decisions in Limberhand, Maguire, Phillips, Mang and Busta and the above referred to standards of care set forth in Prosser and Keeton on Torts and in comment b to § 298 of the Restatement, we hold that, as a matter of law, the owner of a firearm has a duty to the general public to use and to store the firearm in a safe and prudent manner taking into consideration the type of firearm, whether it is loaded or unloaded, whether the ammunition is in close proximity or easily attainable, and the location and circumstances of its use and storage.

    Because we conclude that Susanj owed a legal duty to the general public to store his firearm and ammunition in a manner consistent with this standard of care,...
  6. In general someone who keeps his gun either on his person under his control or locked up (there are lock boxes with key touch combinations offering ready access to a loaded gun) will go a long way towards avoiding such risks. If someone habitually leaves his loaded gun on the coffee table, he's probably toast if some unauthorized person, like his child, hurts someone with it. And if the gun was tucked away in his sock drawer, it'll be up to the jury; but I wouldn't want to have to count on a jury's tender mercies.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old February 23, 2018, 10:00 PM   #45
Jackpro555
Member
 
Join Date: February 19, 2018
Location: Mountainview, Carlifornia
Posts: 21
Yeah, you are right "Safety First". I don't hesitate to keep my gun in a safe and secure place. I have 2 nephew at home they are about 4-6 years old and very fastidious. So thinking to keep my gun in a locker. And one of my friend suggested me to read https://www.gunsafeguru.com/top-10-best-gun-safes/ Much appreciate. Really great tips for gun safe.
Jackpro555 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13588 seconds with 10 queries