Author Topic: Megan's Law  (Read 1420 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

pop pop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
  • Location: middle TN
Megan's Law
« on: February 27, 2016, 05:23:12 AM »
Two female representatives introduced a home storage law yesterday in Tennessee. They are attempting to make parents responsible for storage of guns in the home. The bill coves children 15 and below. If a parent stores a gun where a 15 year old, or younger, gets to it, and shoots someone, either accidently or on purpose, then they will hold the owner of the gun responsible for wrongful storage of the gun.

Of course, they used inaccurate stats to prove their point and said 10 child death occurred in TN last year, and this bill would have prevented them. Actually 2 deaths were neglect(Megan's 11 year old brother shot her, with father's stored gun, because she would not share with him) and the other 8 were drug or gang related teens deaths they used.

What is your thoughts on such laws. Pro gun talking head said what they were attempting was to make all guns, in TN, be locked up or on the ones person.


Taurian

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7893
  • Location: About 3,546 Miles S.E. of Nome Alaska
Re: Megan's Law
« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2016, 09:41:30 AM »
Regardless of the statistics, as incorrect as they are, it is ultimately the responsibility of the legal gun owner to secure his or her firearms. Illegal gun owners will not follow the law anyway, and it is a moot point to expect that they would.

Common sense says to never leave a loaded firearm unattended. Common sense not to drive while intoxicated.  Common sense says not to place hand in meat grinder while it is grinding meat.  Unfortunately, there is a short supply of common sense these days, or so it seems.

Regardless of the IQ of a person, regardless of their level of education, regardless of how much training a person receives, there are times when they are just plain stupid in many ways outside of their sphere of influence (and even inside).

I am not for more laws, but I am for more education. But, you cannot teach those who are unwilling to learn.
The fact that the GOVERNMENT would even consider removing the natural right to bear arms is the very reason why the 2nd Amendment was written.

pop pop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
  • Location: middle TN
Re: Megan's Law
« Reply #2 on: February 27, 2016, 03:12:56 PM »
If these legislators were really interested in saving children, they would put the NRA Eddie Eagle program in every school and train children, form an early age onward, in gun safety.

I knew where my father's revolver was from the time I can remember onward. I never got his gun and shot my sisters because they would not share with me. I was also trained in gun safety, by my father, when I was very young.

My mother got the gun, one night, and scared a rapist off of our front porch, after dad was taken away to a sanatorium because of T B. Yes, I truly believe she would have shot the guy before allowing him to molest her. So did the drunk.

You know, you can't fix stupid (Megan's 11 year old brother). There is a lot more wrong there than meets the eye, IMO.   

M1911A1

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3933
  • Location: I'm at the far upper left-hand corner of the US.
Re: Megan's Law
« Reply #3 on: February 27, 2016, 03:32:09 PM »
About Progressive Lawmaking, But Only Indirectly About "Megan's Law":

No law will ever save a fool from the results of his foolishness.

While I believe that it is indeed the government's business to mandate that every motor vehicle be equipped with seat belts, it is most definitely not within the government's purview to cite and penalize anyone for not using those seat belts.
The government has the right to mandate the presence of safety equipment, but it does not have the right to force me to use that equipment.

The government's argument is that if you use the safety equipment, you save society the expense of repairing you after an accident.
But that is a red herring. The "cost to society" is based solely upon the notion that the government, or the people as a whole, is required to pay your medical expenses for you.
But that apportionment of your personal expenses, especially those expenses which result from your own stupidity, are also not properly the purview of government, Obamacare notwithstanding.

(My personal point of view? If you are willfully uninsured, and you injure yourself due to your own willful stupidity, then the ER staff has the moral and legal right to say, "Let the idiot die, preferably in great pain.")

Here: Hold my beer, and watch this...
Steve,
retired leathersmith and practical shooter


"Qui desiderat pacem, pręparet bellum."

Taurian

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7893
  • Location: About 3,546 Miles S.E. of Nome Alaska
Re: Megan's Law
« Reply #4 on: February 27, 2016, 04:57:55 PM »
Helmet laws are in effect when riding a motorcycle, scooter, bicycle, etc.  The use of them may or may not save your noggin'  No matter, I continue to see riders (and their passengers) wearing a helmet but no other protective gear.  Even the helmets, which are supposed to be SNELL-approved, are laughable.

When I rode, and call me a wussy if you want, but a while a helmet adorned the head, good leather took care of the upper body, gloves protected the hands, boots protected the feet, and leather chaps took care of the rest.  In the hot summer (when I tried to ride as much in the morning and evenings as much as possible) the protective gear was a burden, but I refused to be a burden should things go wrong and I find myself skidding down some road when I and the motorcycle had to part company (been there, done that).

A.B.A.T.E has been battling mandatory helmet laws since their existence.  I agreed with them and helped with the fight for a while. I believed (and still believe) in wearing one and I felt that should be my choice and not one made for me.  However, I finally found it quite insane to see riders down alcohol and doing drugs when riding - but they wore their helmets - so they were legal.

Even in professional racing, the use of the HANS device was not mandated in NASCAR until 2005, well after Dale Earnhardt's death in 2001.  A driver can walk away from a 200 mph crash due to safety equipment installed in the vehicle and worn by the driver. Why not mandate the same safety gear for the everyday driver that is far from having the skills of an FIA, CART, NASCAR, or NHRA driver. Imagine how many lives that would save!  Heck, people complain because they can't text and drive or fry their brain cells out with their cell phone while driving. Imagine the imposition of having to don a Nomex suit and helmet before you head out the door to work each morning.

Safety devices and mandated safety laws are a bane to freedom-loving people, it seems.  How many people actually use those gun locks provided by the manufacturer?  It's not mandatory to use them so why bother.  Will the "wellness" police show up at your door to check if the locks are being used?

As responsible gun owners, we know the risk of firearms ownership, storage, and handling and we do our best to mitigate the risks. It is our own damn fault if we misuse the firearm and/or neglect our responsibilities associated with them.

I am growing weary of laws that serve to prosecute, or persecute, rather than to protect.

Quote
“There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”
― Ayn Rand

Enough for tonight - food awaits.
The fact that the GOVERNMENT would even consider removing the natural right to bear arms is the very reason why the 2nd Amendment was written.

M1911A1

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3933
  • Location: I'm at the far upper left-hand corner of the US.
Re: Megan's Law
« Reply #5 on: February 27, 2016, 05:12:37 PM »
I wrote this note into another thread on this forum, but I believe that it belongs here as well:

Things like Megan's Law tend to make me think in bigoted terms.
I don't believe that it's me: I'm prejudiced, as is everyone, but I've never been consciously bigoted.
I truly believe that my own personal bigotry is caused, and is driven by, the rigorously Politically Correct among us, and by their "good works."
Steve,
retired leathersmith and practical shooter


"Qui desiderat pacem, pręparet bellum."

oldranger53

  • The Ranger Creed-words to live by
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3880
  • 2/503d INF ABN 173d BDE ABN
    • Temporary website home with basic information.
Re: Megan's Law
« Reply #6 on: February 27, 2016, 10:12:54 PM »
I'm of the opinion that more laws are simply not necessary.

Last year, 3 (THREE!) people I knew (one relative, one friend here in town, and one Internet friend) died by self inflicted gunshots.

I'm sure two of those deaths could have been prevented IF more responsibility and more common sense was exercised by the humanoids just one level up, on the "chain of custody" (so to speak) of the firearms used.

One was a blatant suicide (my friend here in town).
One was ruled "accidental" (my relative).

I know the humanoids who had custody of the firearms just prior to those who shot themselves with em.

Both times, it was either laziness and complacency, or sheer stupidity on the part of the humanoids...that allowed the deaths to happen.

More laws will not stop that kind of thing.  At best, it will make a small subset of people "feel good" for a while.  That's about it.


<Sent from phone. Typos possible.>

Never shall I fail my comrades. I will always keep myself mentally alert, physically strong and morally straight, and I will shoulder more than my share of the task whatever it may be.  One hundred percent and then some.