Either locked up or carried. Apparently, it’s now the law in CA:
Governor Signs Senator Portantino’s Landmark Gun Storage Bill (msn.com)
3 Likes
From the article:
“The bill expands on Senator Portantino’s earlier firearm safe storage efforts by expanding storage requirments to thwart gun violence,”
This is EXACTLY why we should oppose ANY Gun Control Laws! Escalation, nibble nibble nibble CHOMP! "Oh Boy, We got That One Passed and signed, now we can “expand” it.
8 Likes
That fine person is related to Pelosi,and she’s probably sorority sister to Killrey.That’s why those libs spineless Joe in office.
3 Likes
I don’t agree with everything stated in the article and this wasn’t the entire bill I’m sure. That being said I don’t have a issue with a gun owner being expected to have their firearms secured in away that NOBODY but them have access to them. I don’t have kids in my home it’s just me and my wife and all my firearms except my EDC is locked up and when we have visitors I double check to be sure all weapons are secured, again except for my EDC that is either on me or put someplace out of sight.
3 Likes
MA already has that law… and can only have ONE loaded in your safe as well
3 Likes
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. If they got Pelosi at the capital, none of what is going on would have ever happened. And the way they are going, it is going to be an assault on team blue if Kamala “wins.” No one believes that 'it" could win a game of tic tac toe, let alone leader of the free world.
1 Like
That’s my point. Without any Government intervention you act like a knowledgeable, responsible firearms owner that gives a damn about firearms safety.
3 Likes
I’ve got a problem with this.
When we had children in the house, I kept them(firearms not children) locked up.
As an empty nester, I still keep them (handguns) locked up. But now home invasions are a pretty big deal around here.
If I’m understanding this new law correctly, staging any firearm that couldn’t be carried, like a shotgun or carbine, would be verboten.
Another problem—a true story—in the county North of us a man and his wife drove into town leaving the seven kids to take care of the farm the eldest being 16 years old.
A nutjob with a machete came on the farm and attacked the children. The eldest did his best to fight off the machete wieldier while the next oldest, a daughter, the ran to the neighbor’s house, who she knew had a shotgun.
The neighbor refused to help but called the sheriff and the girl ran back home to help her brother.
By the time the sheriff arrived, all the children in the family had been murdered.
I don’t know if the family had any firearms, or if they did if they were locked up or not, but the results were certainly tragic enough to make me wonder if the notion of one size fits all gun “safety” legislation
is safe at all.
5 Likes
As far as I’m concerned, Peter got it right. Our kids are grown now, but when they were young and having friends over, the time came to lock them up. Now that they’re grown I still lock all but my EDC up, and it stays close by. I especially make sure everything is locked and monitored when we’re gone. Who wants to come home to someone in their house and they are armed with one of your guns. Nor do I need the nightmare of having to explain one of my guns being used in a crime if stolen. ABC: always be carrying, or a reasonable facsimile thereof. I hate laws, so I’ll put it this way, my risk tolerance dictates my actions regarding this topic. I usually carry, my protection. The rest are locked, to control my liability.
4 Likes
Im going to repeat my usual objections and try to defend it. But I feel like it’s going to have the usual effect.
I am a Constitutional Absolutist Libertarian.
The Constitution of the United States of America. Says what it says, and means what it says.
A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed”.
What really surprises me, is how many here are ok with it. I get it, safety is critical. But there are 0 laws that made me be safer. I took personal responsibility for my actions and made myself do the right thing. My Rights, my responsibility.
To many people want a Granny State. This thing about safety and training needing the .gov to legislate taking personal responsibility for “your actions and the initiative”.
“I am responsible for my actions”. I do not need “The State” to legislate my actions… Before my child was born I baby proofed my house, when she became old enough to get into things she got “the talk” about firearms. I had a safe a decade + before she was even a gleam in my eye.
If you remove the term safety and training and insert concealed carry and the responses would be night and day.
The body of law has 22,000 firearms related laws. Yet we have murders and mass shootings. How can you not see
“Shall Not Be Infringed”
Yet when safety and training come up and infringement there is A-Okay. An Infringement is an Infringement, I don’t need a law to tell me to do the right thing. My Mother’s boyfriend taught me about guns. He was a Mastery Gunnery Sergeant, who had firearms, all over the place, not one of which was locked up. He accepted the responsibility for his actions and he taught me firearms are not toys.
I can not count how many times I’ve related the memories of riding to school on my horse with a .22, many of you have talked about going to school and how every car or truck had a rifle or shotgun in the window. Many schools when I was growing up were K - 12. All in one space, meaning 5 Y/O’s, in theory, had access to firearms.
7 Likes
I live alone. My dog isn’t going to use my pistol on my nightstand. But CommieLa thinks it’s ok for the Gestapo to invade my home to make sure I’m storing it “properly”. I’m not getting assaulted by the three or more thugs kicking in my door because I have to ask them to hold on while I open my safe.
4 Likes
So are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?
1 Like
I have an issue with legislating common sense.
1 Like
I’m definitely with @Zavier_D on that one. This is unconstitutional. The government has no business in how firearms are stored in a private property.
Careless people will be careless no matter what.
Criminals will not care.
This law is just another excuse to add to the endless unconstitutional “laws” to make it cumbersome, difficult and expensive to own firearms.
Nothing to do with safety. Want to do something about safety, California? How about you prosecute and lock up violent criminals and stop freeing the ones already in jail?
2 Likes
I am with you 
%
Everytime pro 2a people have compromised by being the adult in the room. we have been taken advantage of
6 Likes
That’s exactly what happens. This article is about expanding existing law to punish law abiding citizens even more severely. Another that Newsom just signed expands our already ridiculous “red flag” law yet again. Living in CA, I’ve seen the Dems use this technique over and over again to water something down to get it passed and then expand, expand, expand! It’s what made me zero tolerance for any firearms related laws.
2 Likes
One of my biggest pet peeves is when someone tells me, “I’m pro-2A, but…” That’s where most of the BS starts and it’s usually around safety (often referencing children).
3 Likes
Criminals. Are. Going. To. Criminal.
Careless. Irresponsible. Citizens. Are. Careless. And. Irresponsible.
So if my Rights and Responsibilities are predicated upon the worst actors in society. Then I don’t have rights and responsibilities, I have privileges and permissions. Not Rights, not Responsibilities.
5 Likes