Mr. Mojo...could you ping the bang list? Thanks
Three cheers for this guy -- maybe his "disease" will spread to others in the MSM! Real logic and sanity -- wow, a shock!!
I’m sure there’s a judge on bench right now contemplating how this law’s an unconstitutional infringement on the right to keep and bare arms.
The only problem I have with this is that it wasn' t extended to all industries. As someone who has a small business on the side that makes some car accessories and who has been sued when someone purposely misused the product, I would welcome the protection from stupid lawsuits like that.
My case eventually got tossed out of court, but I still had to spend quite a bit of money and suspend manufacture for a while.
Kind of falls into the catagory of "Liberal until being mugged".
How is this good sense? I don't want a child safety lock and I don't want to pay the increased cost for something I don't want and won't use. Why should the federal government force me to?
Politicians are control freaks who aren't satisfied unless they're meddling in people's personal business.
Just like the author screwed up an otherwise good commentary, the idiots in Washington screwed up an otherwise (on the surface) good bill.
"The Senate also showed good sense by approving an amendment requiring child safety locks be sold with all handguns."
Does this still constitute "gun-control?"
I have a bad feeling about "requiring" gun dealers to sell anything with the gun they just sold. In our community, the NRA just handed out 10,000 trigger locks to anyone who wanted them. Requiring the gun dealer to do anything associated with the selling of a firearm is still "gun-control."
What is next? A law that requires every gun owner to have a gun lock on their guns or face a fine and jail time? I don't know, but it seems to me that the seatbelt laws started this way, first the car manufactors were "required" to have them in the car, and then, laws were passed to "require" everyone to wear a seatbelt!
Just a thought.
I've been saying this for years.
This shakedown is nothing new. In the 1970s, IBM was sued because someone commited fraud with an IBM computer.
I sent Mr. Lenz a thank-you note. His voice should be encouraged.
Want to feel good...watch "Runaway Jury" and then laugh you ass off at the hilarious ending, knowing that the Left has been stripped of a huge bogeyman. John Grisham is such a commie dog. Haha, you putz, you don't have Smith and Wesson to kick around anymore.
My reply:
You wrote:
---
"The Senate also showed good sense by approving an amendment requiring child safety locks be sold with all handguns."
---
In 2000, 80 children (age 0-14) lost their lives in accidental shootings. That same year, 800 lost their lives to drowning.
That firearm fatality figure has been declining steadily over the years as education programs such as the NRA's Eddie Eagle reach more and more school children.
Mandating the purchase of a $10-$20 lock with each new handgun purchase, amounting to $18-$36 million in additional expense to handgun buyers every year, comes out to $225,000 to $450,000 per child fatality. Per "life saved," the cost undobtedly goes into the millions.
This is the kind of math that apparently eludes Senators Kohl, Feinstein, and Schumer.
-Michael Pelletier.
BTTT
Good news!
One minor problem: Requiring the sale of trigger locks is a regressive tax. You are adding to the price of a handgun purchase. The poorer one is, the bigger the bite from the cost of the mandated lock. (Trigger locks are also dangerous, but that's another matter.)