Huffington Post
Pincus asks the members assembled where they thought gun safes should be located, in the interest of home defense.
"How about putting a quick-access safe in your kids’ room?" Pincus asks. "We have an emotional push back to that. Here’s my position on this. If you’re worried that your kid is going to try to break into the safe that is in their bedroom, with a gun in it, you have bigger problems than home defense."
As the group laughs, Pincus explains that in a home invasion situation, it makes sense to have a gun stored in a bedroom you're instinctively moving to defend.
"If that alarm goes off and the glass breaks and the dog starts barking, what’s the instinct that most people are going to have, in regards to, 'Am I going to run across the house to get the gun, or am I going to run over here to help the screaming kid?'" Pincus said. "And if I’m going to go to the kid anyway, and I have an extra gun and an extra safe, why not put it in their closet?"
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
I appreciate you sharing the info!
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your coming by. I'm thinking of starting one of those side-bar options like on TTAG.
Delete***Rob Pincus reads Mikeb302000***
I had Colion stop by too a couple weeks ago.
This isn't a bad idea, but a better one would be a quickly accessible gun in the bedroom so that you aren't unarmed while heading to the kid's bedroom.
ReplyDeleteKeep it locked up or on you until you go to bed, then lock the bedroom door (one of plenty of reasons for mom and dad's door to be locked), put on a light, and keep it on the nightstand, in a bed holster, etc.
It's a reasonable idea. I don't have children, so it's not something I have to think about.
ReplyDeleteThe best location for a home defense firearm is on a shelf near the ceiling right above the head of mom and dad's bed. The firearm should only be there in an unlocked state while mom and dad are in bed.
ReplyDeleteThis provides instant access for mom and dad and no need to fumble with trigger locks or a safe lock. And there is no way the kids are going to access it without waking up mom and dad ... unless mom and dad are able to sleep with a tall child standing on their face.
F.Y.I. Nearly all easy or quick access security boxes for handguns are a security disaster. I watched a video of a three or four year old boy that managed to break open every one of multiple brands presented for his "amusement". And it didn't take much more than a few minutes for him to figure out every one of them. Either store your firearms in a substantial safe or on your hip.
- TruthBeTold
I think one of you geniuses should invent a sleep-holster. I mean, those precious seconds wasted in retrieving your nearby weapon could make all the difference.
ReplyDeleteAnd again, you respond with snide remarks and derision rather than an argument.
DeleteBut, you guys are so easy to make fun of. I can't help myself.
DeleteWow, and all pretext of discussion and debate goes out the window.
DeleteGuys, I'm afraid we've lost all hope on this one--the devolution is almost complete: Mike has become Jade Jr.
But, you guys are so easy to make fun of. I can't help myself.
DeleteHey, Mikeb! Remember this?
And notice how even in this you shirk responsibility. You can't help yourself because I'm so deserving of the names you use and worse even. It's bullshit, Kurt. You do it because you like bullying people, that's my guess, but whatever the real reason, cut it out please.
So, with "[us] guys" being "so easy to make fun of," that you "can't help [your]self," would you say that you are "shirking responsibility," or does that only apply to me?
Is it "bullshit" when you do it, or am I the only bullshitter?
Is it your guess that "you like bullying people," or is that, once again, just me?
I'd love to see your explanation. I'm sure you have some way of explaining how this doesn't reek of hypocrisy on your part. Right?
Right, Mikeb? Right?
So many times and in so many ways, gun control freaks show themselves to believe that rules are for us, not for them.
DeleteKurt, I guess you have a good comparison there. One difference however is that my teasing you silly and paranoid gun nuts does not result in a deletable offensive comment. Your uncontrollable responses to my opinions often does.
DeleteOne difference however is that my teasing you silly and paranoid gun nuts does not result in a deletable offensive comment.
DeleteThat "difference" is quite dubious, don't you think, given the fact that it is you who decides what comments are "deletable" and "offensive"?
I'm afraid I find your "reasoning" to be very much less than impressive.
Keep working on it, and better luck next time!
Um, Mikeb, you're making no sense. Are you saying that your attacks on us never rise to the level that you would feel the need to delete them? Or are you saying that most of us show a good deal more restraint when responding to your attacks than you show in making them?
DeleteLets see here: All you've complained about openly were Kurt calling you an asshole and calling you filth.
DeleteYou've called us sick, ignorant hillbillies, cold-hearted bastards (or was it sons of bitches), insinuated that we were Nazis (which is pretty rich when aimed at libertarians), etc.
And this list comes from memory, not searching the archives for your comments. Sick and Filth seem to be pretty much on the same level--generic insults, with Filth being a little less common.
And Asshole? Oh no! He called you a dirty body part! One that has become synonymous with "jerk", and about as commonly used.
When you use Bastard and Son of a Bitch, you're making aspersions on our parentage--something that a literal interpretation of is far more insulting than a comparison to an anal sphincter. Of course, they've also become common equivalents for jerk and asshole in modern use.
Maybe Kurt's cut loose in some of the posts that we haven't seen, but to an outside observer who's seen you complain about, and then delete posts that contained "asshole" and "filth", this looks like a bunch of thin skinned griping.
Wrong. I've never called you, Tennessean, any of those things. I sometimes speak to the general world of gun-rights fanatics like that, but not to you personally, which is what Kurt does. I consider gun-rights fanatics on the same level with gun-grabbers or control freaks.
DeleteWhen have I called anyone a bastard or son of a bitch?
Besides, as Kurt reminded us, I am the sole arbiter of this.
I'll add this. I've come to realize that comments from Tennessean and Greg can safely be posted without close scrutiny. I appreciate and respect that.
Mike,
DeleteWhat I was thinking of, specifically, was this post:
http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2013/04/newtown-families-leading-new-wave-of.html
I couldn't remember the exact wording, but here it is:
"I'd like to hear some of the pro-gun fellas respond to this. I'll bet you prove Jim Carrey right when he called you 'cold-hearted bastards.'"
Yeah, it was Jim Carey's words, but you were saying that you bet that our comments on the post would prove them true about us. It's a round-about way of saying it, but it does amount to calling us bastards.
Frankly, I can't care less what you call us. I'll point out if it shows prejudice or disrespect, but you're free to say what you will. It's your blog, and you're free to delete posts or refuse to let people call you names if you want, I was just pointing out what I thought was a double standard.
Frankly, I figure that if someone tosses too much invective, it hurts their side--kinda like how I can't imagine that some of Laci's angry and insulting posts this week helped your side much in the eyes of any new visitors. If he stuck to his legal arguments, he might convince people. It could even get interesting and edifying if he responded to our counter arguments with his own counters.
However, most of the time, he would salt his legal arguments with comments about how anyone who didn't agree with him was an obvious mental defective, and any attempts to argue back with him were met with long series of posts telling us what idiots we were and that he wasn't responding to us because we weren't worth the time it would take to respond to us. If that's his feelings--don't respond, or say that once. Don't say it 50 times, and make several NEW blog entries, not just comments, but blog entries, about how we're idiots and not worth taking time to respond to.
I know you agree with Laci's legal analyses, but you ave to admit that he got down in the dirt and quite silly looking at times. Did I troll him? A little bit. But he took the troll bait and reacted badly.
If Kurt is too insulting, he may drive people toward your side just like I'm sure Thomas did a while back with some of his posts. (And if you're around Thomas, I don't mean to insult you--you said plenty of good things, but there was one time that I called you out for something you said ((incident remains in my memory but not the details)).)
Wrong. I've never called you, Tennessean, any of those things. I sometimes speak to the general world of gun-rights fanatics like that, but not to you personally . . .
DeleteDo you consider Tennessean to be a "gun rights fanatic"? If so, any condemnation of "gun rights fanatics" in general is a condemnation of Tennessean specifically.
Besides, as Kurt reminded us, I am the sole arbiter of this.
True, but your "sole arbiter" status does not lessen the hypocrisy of your applying such radically disparate standards of behavior--and imposing radically disparate rules--on those with whom you claim to want to "debate," as compared to the standards and rules you impose on yourself and your ideological allies.
I couldn't remember the exact wording, but here it is:
Delete"I'd like to hear some of the pro-gun fellas respond to this. I'll bet you prove Jim Carrey right when he called you 'cold-hearted bastards.'"
Yeah, it was Jim Carey's words, but you were saying that you bet that our comments on the post would prove them true about us. It's a round-about way of saying it, but it does amount to calling us bastards.
And don't forget "heartless motherfuckers":
As Jim Carrey said, only heartless motherfuckers like the gun-rights fanatics could respond with cynicism to this.
Anyway, before I got distracted by the apparent . . . discrepancy in Mikeb's standards of behavior, I stopped by here to have a word about kids and guns.
ReplyDeleteHave any of you seen the shrieking "think of the children" outrage about the NRA's Youth Day? Hilarious.
I think my favorite part is this:
“This is indoctrination,” said Jose Sequeiros, 67, of Houston. “These kids are too young to see that guns are wrong.”
Get it? He says "guns are wrong"! Is that not among the funniest damned things you've ever seen?
Anti-gun people. We'll have to keep some of them alive, just for the giggles they provide.
I agree that "guns are wrong" is not the best way to express the gun-control sentiment. I prefer "guns do more harm than good." But, you've made it abundantly clear that you don't give a fuck how much harm they do as long as you are not inconvenienced.
DeleteUm--no. Guns are, of course, inherently harmless (and, admittedly "goodless," as well). They are equipment, incapable of independent action.
DeleteFurthermore, my being "inconvenienced" is irrelevant. I don't oppose forcible citizen disarmament because I think of government-mandated defenselessness as "inconvenient"--I believe it to be evil. Likewise, I don't see acceptance of tyranny as "inconvenient"--I see it as abjectly contemptible.
You fail again. Kudos for consistency, at least!
Not true. We've shown you that the harm from guns has dropped over the last two decades. Your argument from social utility fails right there. You can speculate about what a wonderful world it would be if guns had been removed altogether, but the evidence is that with looser gun laws and more gun ownership and carry, the trend is in the right direction. That being the case, your desire for increased control isn't justified.
DeleteThat's because we protect rights in spite of the potential harm that can arise. This is also why I don't give a fuck how much harm comes from free speech, the guys at South Park still get to draw pictures of Muhammad if they want to. (Too bad Comedy Central is too chickenshit to air them.)
DeleteYou punish the rioters and murderers; you don't abridge the freedom of the offending artists. You punish the criminals misusing guns; you don't limit the freedom of everyone else.