Guns and kids in the home

or you could fumble with the key in the dark while the intrutder runs up the stairs to kill your family.. hey man its your life but dont let a stupid law put your family in danger.

Huh? Where in this thread (or this entire site) did I ever recommend that someone use a safe that requires a key?

First of all, there are ways to safely store a firearm and yet access it quickly. Secondly, if you are going to suggest a method of storage that is against the law, it would be best to at least mention to readers that it is against the law so that they could decide whether or not to run that risk. Or were you unaware that your suggestion violated MA law?

I do know of two people in my town who have lost their licenses due to improper storage.

Note that I have never defended Chapter 180 of the 1998 laws. I despise most all of it. But I do my best to educate others about it so that they do not end up in legal trouble due to their ignorance.
 
Last edited:
Bobkatt: The Heller case is substantially different. But I think that is a topic for a different thread.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. But In both cases you have government or law enforcement, telling citizens that in their very own homes that the firearm that they use to defend their home with has to be locked up when it is not in their control or being carried on them.

So to me these two instances are substantially similar. Atleast similar enough that both put a handicap on your efficiency in being able to preserve the lives of your family should an armed attack occur. A lot of us like to use the slogan "when seconds count the police are only minutes away.", and seconds do count. Seconds lost fumbling with a lock and a key or a combination and pulling your gun out of a safe could spell out the difference from you defending yourself with the weapon or the criminal holding you at gunpoint before are able to bring your means of defense to the situation.

Criminals pick the time, place, and method of attack. You're already at a major disadvantage. Add any other obstacle to the situation and you are increasing your chances of turning into a victim substancially. So yes, both cases are very similar.
 
Bobkatt: Sorry, I disagree with you entirely.

DC law completely prevents law abiding citizens from using a firearm to protect themselves. They cannot own a handgun, and long guns must be disassembled or locked up and unloaded.

In contrast, MA laws allow almost all people to own long guns, and many people to own handguns. Both can be stored loaded. Both can be accessed quickly. They just have to be locked up when not under direct control. The result is that MA law allows citizens to effectively use firearms to defend their homes, whereas DC law completely prohibits it. In MA you can walk around your house with a loaded handgun in your holster. You can sleep at night with a loaded handgun in a quick-access safe by your bedside. In DC you cannot even own a handgun and can't have a loaded gun of any kind in your home.

Do I like the MA gun laws? Of course not. But you are asserting legal parallels where they do not exist.

And all of this is a major thread hijack that would have been far better addressed in this thread: http://northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=33162&highlight=heller
 
Last edited:
The result is that MA law allows citizens to effectively use firearms to defend their homes, whereas DC law completely prohibits it.[/url]



How can you say that you can effectively use your firearm to defend your home when before you can use it you have to take it out of some form of locked storage? I think that you are under the impression that criminals wait for a fair fight.

Some thug pushes your bedroom door open in the middle of the night and you wake up.


Now in MA the fastest legal solution I can think of is to reach beside your bed, punch in a code on a safe, open the storage container, pull the gun out, and then point it at the POS, before he comes and does whatever he likes to you or your wife.

I would prefer to wake up, grab the gun off the nightstand and point it at the POS. Thats my idea of effective. Because how long does it really take for a thug to walk across a bedroom? Your lucky if you could pull the second scenario off without a bit of a struggle.
 
Some thug pushes your bedroom door open in the middle of the night and you wake up.

If someone can break into your house and waltz into your bedroom without setting off your alarm (whether canine or electronic), then you are way behind the power curve.

I can open my simplex lockbox in 2 seconds.
 
I'm telling you, sleep with a holstered pistol and long arm slung on your back. You're all set because that's direct control.
 
If someone can break into your house and waltz into your bedroom without setting off your alarm (whether canine or electronic), then you are way behind the power curve.

I can open my simplex lockbox in 2 seconds.

Screw the law. It's a stupid and emasculating law, designed to render your weapon less effective. Make your own choices, as your needs and circumstances dictate, and live with them. Why argue about how quickly you can unlock your locked gun?

If you want to set your house alarm, or trust your dog to give you enough warning when roused from a deep sleep to get a weapon ready, then do it. If you have neither a house alarm nor a dog who barks, do what makes sense for you.

Many will choose to ignore that foolish law and keep their weapons locked or unlocked according to the dictates of their own situation, and common sense. Reality hasn't been altered since the passage of that damned stupid law.

Of course, that's just one man's opinion. [wink] YMMV.
 
If someone can break into your house and waltz into your bedroom without setting off your alarm (whether canine or electronic), then you are way behind the power curve.

I can open my simplex lockbox in 2 seconds.

I know plenty of gunowners that rent, and are not allowed dogs in their apartment, and do not have an alarm system. That puts us back at square one.

If it takes you two seconds to go from lying in bed to roll over or reach out, dial your code, pull the gun out of the box, and then point it at where an attacker would be coming from then you are seriously fast and I am glad for you.

This is also being done wide awake. From a dead sleep or even a light sleep it will be a lot slower. I can grab a gun on the nightstand and point it at an attacker in less than a second, wide awake.

I can also tell you that an attacker with a knife or other weapon can cross the room in about that time or a little longer. That same attacker can certainly cross the room and attack you before you get your weapon out of the locked box if he's moving fast. I just went from my door to my bed in about a second. I would rather take every little fraction of a second that I can. You're chance of defending yourself is diminishing exponentially by the second.
 
FYI, that would be against MA law, specifically MGL C140 S131L:

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-131l.htm

Also, I know if I had to do this that some night I would forget to unlock it and some morning I would forget to lock it. I prefer a quick opening safe. YMMV.

Until and unless (over my dead body) the state posts a safety nazi inside my bedroom they have no way of knowing what's on the nightstand between the lamp and the alarm clock.
 
STAY ON TOPIC [crying]

The merits of the MA laws preventing open access to firearms has been discussed many times. Don't make me post the "Not This Shit Again" image.
 
Some of those numbers look odd to me. For example, it shows just 1826 deaths for children ages 1-4. That number looks suspiciously low to me.

Scroll to bottom at National Safety Council 2002-2006 data http://www.nsc.org/lrs/injuriesinamerica08.aspx

Yep - the numbers look small. Makes you wonder.

Kids turn out to be pretty hard to kill I guess. We played with rusty nails, broken glass, ate peanuts and stuck screwdrivers in electrical oulets when I was a kid - I don't recall one of us being killed.
 
Scroll to bottom at National Safety Council 2002-2006 data http://www.nsc.org/lrs/injuriesinamerica08.aspx

Yep - the numbers look small. Makes you wonder.

Kids turn out to be pretty hard to kill I guess. We played with rusty nails, broken glass, ate peanuts and stuck screwdrivers in electrical oulets when I was a kid - I don't recall one of us being killed.

It's a problem that exists but it's by no means an epidemic, and deserves nowhere near the amount of attention that it gets. It only exists because it is a scare tactic that the antis use to further their quest to disarm all citizens. They're trying to strike a sensative chord with people who might be on the fence with firearms so that those people won't feel like they're hurting the general good by voting for someone who believes that Americans do not have the right to self defense via firearm.

It's disgusting.
 
I'm telling you, sleep with a holstered pistol and long arm slung on your back. You're all set because that's direct control.

STAY ON TOPIC [crying]

The merits of the MA laws preventing open access to firearms has been discussed many times. Don't make me post the "Not This Shit Again" image.

I'd give you a junior modman badge, but you kinda snuffed it with the direct control thing (and I'm no artist). An "A" for effort though.
 
To stay on topic, I'd personally have no problem if a pediatrician asked if any firearms in the house are safely stored. Telling me I have to remove all firearms from the house is overstepping their bounds.

The pediatrician does not have an obligation to ensure the well being of the parent. Their concern is the kid and there are moronic parents out there who would keep a chambered, trigger jobbed Glock in a nightstand with easy access for a 4yo. It's been stated on this board that "in my day I'd get a woopin if I touched it blah blah blah". Sorry but that doesn't work in all cases.

If you've got young kids, get a Gunvault or similar. If a pediatrician asks you to remove all firearms, tell them: "I know all about firearm safety, now how's my kid's health?"
 
By the way, while I too prefer to keep things simple, here's a $50 coupon for anyone interested in a decent biometric pistol case

I have this safe, find it works quite well, and provides quick access.

I'm pretty sure I would wake before a BG can break into my home and make his way upstairs without me having a chance to access my firearm. I know some mentioned reacting slowly from a dead sleep and used this reasoning for keeping a loaded gun ready on top of the nightstand. My thought on this is if you can't react quick enough to get your gun out of a quick access safe due to a slow reaction from being asleep. Well if you are that groggy I would be concerned about being able to correctly identify my target prior to reacting. Since I have children this is very important to me.

Back to the doctors BS. I would find it very offensive to be asked such personal questions that do not pertain to the health or care of my child. I certainly would let the doctor that I feel those questions are personal and would refuse to answer. As I stated I have children. So for me personally, if the gun is not on my person it is in the safe. Period. This is the only way I am 100% sure my kids won't have an accident involving my firearms. I live in NH so the "safe storage laws" don't apply to me, but I personally feel keeping them locked up is best. If others are comfortable keeping a loaded gun on the nightstand, than have at it. As long as my kids aren't in your house, I really don't care how you store your firearms. If I didn't have children, or nieces/nephews that visit perhaps I wouldn't hesitate to leave a loaded firearm on a nightstand, kitchen table, etc.
 
The pediatrician does not have an obligation to ensure the well being of the parent. Their concern is the kid and there are moronic parents out there who would keep a chambered, trigger jobbed Glock in a nightstand with easy access for a 4yo. It's been stated on this board that "in my day I'd get a woopin if I touched it blah blah blah". Sorry but that doesn't work in all cases."
Speak for yourself. Maybe you cannot control your children. Maybe your children do not have any respect for the boundaries you set. Mine does. Mine knows where my guns are and does not dare touch them.

You, pediatricians who ask about guns, and all others who think they know better what others should do can straight to hell.
 
The pediatrician does not have an obligation to ensure the well being of the parent. Their concern is the kid and there are moronic parents out there who would keep a chambered, trigger jobbed Glock in a nightstand with easy access for a 4yo. It's been stated on this board that "in my day I'd get a woopin if I touched it blah blah blah". Sorry but that doesn't work in all cases.

Nightstand? Wassat? I keep it under my pillow; single action to wake up, arm, aim, shoot.
 
Speak for yourself. Maybe you cannot control your children. Maybe your children do not have any respect for the boundaries you set. Mine does. Mine knows where my guns are and does not dare touch them.

You, pediatricians who ask about guns, and all others who think they know better what others should do can straight to hell.

You can control a 3 or 4yo with 100% effectiveness?
[rolleyes][rofl]

And the same to you Jose about where to go.
 
I have this safe, find it works quite well, and provides quick access.

I'm pretty sure I would wake before a BG can break into my home and make his way upstairs without me having a chance to access my firearm. I know some mentioned reacting slowly from a dead sleep and used this reasoning for keeping a loaded gun ready on top of the nightstand. My thought on this is if you can't react quick enough to get your gun out of a quick access safe due to a slow reaction from being asleep. Well if you are that groggy I would be concerned about being able to correctly identify my target prior to reacting. Since I have children this is very important to me.

I would not bet my life on anything electronic, let alone finger-print technology. Yes, I am a skeptic and out of a million times using it, it will never fail, but if you knew my luck you know that it will fail the one time I need it. And I leave nothing up to chance if I have the choice when it comes to my family's safety

Perhaps you have an alarm system or a dog like M1911 mentioned, but a lot of gun owners do not. If you underestimate a burgerlars ability to enter your house and sneak around without you knowing, and you have no alarm system or other means to alert you, then you might be making a grave mistake.

My thought on this is if you can't react quick enough to get your gun out of a quick access safe due to a slow reaction from being asleep. Well if you are that groggy I would be concerned about being able to correctly identify my target prior to reacting. Since I have children this is very important to me.

Lock your guns up somewhere else then put another object in that lockbox like an apple. Then lock it. Now open it back up and check again to make sure it's an apple and not a gun then lock it again. Tell your wife, girlfriend, child, friend, etc., to open your door at 1 a.m. after you are asleep and yell to wake you up. Then as fast as you can, reach over, swipe your finger, open the box, pull the apple out and point it at the wall. (don't point an apple at anything your not willing to hit with an apple). In the meantime have the person run at the bed and jump on you. See what happens. Then do the same process with the apple on the nightstand.

Now how happy are you with the lock box? Okay I noticed before you mentioned that your gun will always be in the box because that is the only way you can insure that your child will never have an accident with the gun. And that is something that I absolutely respect. That is your method and that works for you and no one should question it. Not me, not your doctor, not deval patrick. All I'm saying is for someone who chooses a different method, doesnt have kids, etc. The lock box is a handicap and could mean the difference of life and death.
 
The next time your pediatrician starts that crap, don't sit there and take it. Here's what I would say if I was in your position:

1. What is your training in firearm safety?
2. Have you taken a firearms safety class?
3. Are you a firearms instructor certified by the MA State Police to teach firearms safety classes?
4. Are you a certified range safety officer?
5. Are you familiar with Mass General Law Chapter 140 Section 131L that governs storage of guns in MA?

You're not? Well I AM!

6. Does your malpractice insurance company know that you are giving out advice about a subject for which you have no training?
7. I will be contacting the Board of Registration concerning this boundary violation.

I would then walk out.


Absolutely! I would tell him/her to shove that anti-gun propaganda up their ass and FOAD.

If they are more concerned about guns in my home, how concerned are they really about my child? Apparently, if their liberal institutions turned their minds into a drivelling pile of mush that regurgitates the latest anit-propaganda, how good of a doctor are they really?

I want someone who is concerned about the health of my child: Leave me to their safety.
 
A lot of people are such sheep that they take a recommendation from some authority figure (such as the American Academy of Pediatrics) as a divine command. Others will simply invoke some alleged requirement in an attempt to avoid taking responsibility for their own behavior. If there actually were such a requirement, I'd note that a lot of physicians seem to be in violation of it.

By the way, while I too prefer to keep things simple, here's a $50 coupon for anyone interested in a decent biometric pistol case.

Ken

+1 for the coupon...this looks like a better option for me. As stated in posts above, I for one do not have control of my 3 yo and 1 yo. A while back I told my daughter what to do if she saw a gun. I thought she understood what I was telling her...not more then two weeks after the talk she got on top of her grandfathers bed and pulled out a 'look alike' gun ponted at me and pulled the trigger. First of all she got a GOOD talking to, but most of all it but a chill down my spine. I could never leave an unsecured loaded gun in my home until they can be trusted and can comprehend the reality that real guns are not toys. Let me state that this is just my preferance at this time.

Off topic a bit I was researching biovault and wanted to reprint a FAQ
Q: Can someone cutoff my finger and try to use it to open the BioVault?
A: No, BioVault 2.0 uses technology that detects live fingers for scanning, so in the unfortunate event that a detached finger is used to attempt access the unit will not open.

[shocked]

.
 
+1 for the coupon...this looks like a better option for me. As stated in posts above, I for one do not have control of my 3 yo and 1 yo. A while back I told my daughter what to do if she saw a gun. I thought she understood what I was telling her...not more then two weeks after the talk she got on top of her grandfathers bed and pulled out a 'look alike' gun ponted at me and pulled the trigger. First of all she got a GOOD talking to, but most of all it but a chill down my spine. I could never leave an unsecured loaded gun in my home until they can be trusted and can comprehend the reality that real guns are not toys. Let me state that this is just my preferance at this time.

Off topic a bit I was researching biovault and wanted to reprint a FAQ
Q: Can someone cutoff my finger and try to use it to open the BioVault?
A: No, BioVault 2.0 uses technology that detects live fingers for scanning, so in the unfortunate event that a detached finger is used to attempt access the unit will not open.

[shocked]

.

I use that BioVault, and have had zero problems so far. It can store up to 50 finger prints, so I stored each index finger at least 10 times so if it reads the print a bit different it will still open. I did the same for additional fingers. After I was done I had my wife try to open it, and it would not recognize her prints.

I agree with your comments about children 100%. No matter how well you teach your children about things the learning process takes time. I am not willing to trust that they will listen or do what is right 100% of the time. I feel it is just more responsible to take precautions to be sure my children remain safe. I feel that the risk of my kids finding my guns and doing something wrong far outweighs the slight risk that not only will someone break into my home, but also that I would not be able to access my guns in time. That is why I choose to keep things locked up.

I don't have a problem with parents that choose to trust that their kids "know better" than to touch their guns. However if parents leave a loaded gun somewhere they can access it and an accident does occur, I believe the parent should be held responsible and prosecuted to the fullest extent including manslaughter and child endangerment.
 
Always keep your gun in it's holster. Mine stays in my pocket or on my belt at all times. When I switch pants, I transfer the firearm(s) over to the fresh set along with my wallet, my keys, my folder, and my cell phone. Should I be wearing my PJs, I just carry my pants with me to the LR to watch TV. This way, I will never not have my firearm, and never have to worry about my son playing with it.
As well, my son has been well versed and well trained with firearm safety since I think 3 y.o. If he wants to use a gun, he just asks and we step outside and crack some off.
At the doctors, whether it's mine or my son's doc, I always start my complaint like this, "While I was at the range the other day (this morning, last evening), I started to notice pain (discomfort, swelling, fever etc.), and wanted you to check it out.
I ALWAYS start out with the gun factor. Sets the mood. Haven't heard any backlash.
Proactive being the key here. HTH and also, get a video of those punks.
 
However if parents leave a loaded gun somewhere they can access it and an accident does occur, I believe the parent should be held responsible and prosecuted to the fullest extent including manslaughter and child endangerment.

Do you think that should be what happens when a child is killed accidentally with anything in or around the home that isn't locked up? For example: medicine, cleaning products, pools, second story windows, refrigerators, power tools, etc.. Or should they only be prosecuted when the accident involves a firearm?
 
Kids just don't have the judgement that adults do, there is no sense in pretending otherwise. I always liked this cartoon, because it reminds me of how I thought when I was seven or eight

ch851227.gif
 
I'm telling you, sleep with a holstered pistol and long arm slung on your back. You're all set because that's direct control.

This is not correct. You can't have direct control of your gun when you are asleep.

While I don't disagree with your intent, it's something I have inquired about in the past, as I thought it a pretty good idea, with some modifications. I have been told that sleeping is not direct control and would not be allowable.

Have you ever fallen asleep with a handgun in your pocket? It may be a little uncomfortable, but it's do-able. The problem I have with it is if I have a dream where I'm facing the Clanton's at the OK corral and I try to outdraw Wyatt Earp. I guareen-freaking-tee you will wake up when you pull the trigger.

I always keep my lock, key and firearm in a drawer next to me (withthe key seperate and hidden). When I leave my house all guns go into the big safe, except for the old wall hangers in the closet with trigger locks on them.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom