Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Raerlynn
Oct 28, 2007

Sorry I'm late, I'm afraid I got lost on the path of life.

mlmp08 posted:

There is a group of gun owners who will accuse you of extreme classism over this take.

I fall under saying lock up your guns, but no one expects you to have a $10,000 vault safe. At least make a kid deliberately break open a locked metal cabinet to access a gun.

I became a gun owner this year. My wife's one requirement was that I purchase a locking cabinet to keep them in. I bought it from Home Depot for $150. I spend more on a range membership then I did on this thing. It bolts to the door, and it's enough to keep casual criminals at bay.

Those gun owners are right up there with anti vaxxers in terms of entitlement. The "I want to do what I want when I want and gently caress anyone else" mindset.

It's loving irresponsible and anyone with that take can eat my entire pasty white rear end.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Raerlynn
Oct 28, 2007

Sorry I'm late, I'm afraid I got lost on the path of life.

That Works posted:

It's more nuanced than that.

In principle I agree that safe storage should be mandatory if you own a gun and everything I own is under lock and key in a location well hidden from the eyes of guests. Where legislating that comes into play / assigning mandatory costs to gun ownership presents a real issue.

That issue being "can we use gun control laws to exclude poorer people from ownership by raising the barrier to entry even further?"



Case in point when I was a quite poor graduate student I wanted to buy a cheap-rear end .22 rifle but lived in a city with really strict gun control laws. The rifle I wanted could have easily been bought at the time for $200.
So, I look into buying it and there is a state-mandated firearms course for basic ownership. That's $100 and can only be done M-F 9 to 5. So, I have to spend $100 and take off work. Also, you have to travel about 15 miles outside of the city to the nearest place doing the classes and its not on any transit line, so throw in another $30 for an Uber / cab there and back plus the lost afternoon of work.

Ok so then I have to take that certificate and then put in a permit application. The city states that the applications take 10-14 days to process. The internet states that the average process time is 4-6 months. So, 6 months later it gets processed and THEN I can make an appointment with the city police to get an interview and background check. This is another $100 fee and must be attended in person, again M-F 9-5 only, so another half day of work off minimum and the nearest appointment is 3 months away.

So now before even being approved to buy a gun (the criteria for approval is up to the police officers discretion) I had waited 9 months, spent $230 and had to take at least 1 day off of work. Now this was only just for a rifle. If I wanted a pistol it's a mandatory shooting test at the police range (booking appointments 6 months in advance) for a $250 fee. So for a pistol I'm looking at almost $500 and a 1 to 1.5 year wait.

So, then lets say the local legislature wants to mandate safe storage and decides that you need at minimum a storage device that costs another $100.



Basically, it adds up quick. If the state wants to mandate training and storage but does not make them available to its poorest members, then it is inherently regressive and disenfranchises poorer owners (which I would argue is the intent anyway).



All that said, many gun owners are just loving dicks about it and irresponsible and should be launched into the sun.

I'm not disputing the point that it adds to the cost. I'm saying, "that's the cost of reducing gun violence in America". At some point we as a society have to draw a line and say "this is the minimum we expect you to adhere to if you want to own a weapon, cost be damned". A cheap pistol safe at Harbor Freight is literally the same price as a box of ammo.

We don't have the same hand wringing about how states require carrying an insurance policy and registering a vehicle on an annual basis disproportionately impacts the poor, because we decided as a society that this was a requirement for the good of everyone.

Raerlynn
Oct 28, 2007

Sorry I'm late, I'm afraid I got lost on the path of life.

facialimpediment posted:

Edit: and I know political tribal poo poo and all that, but I still don't understand how people can look at numbers like these and try to play the FAKE NUMBERS FAKE VAX FAKE NEWS card:

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1472932495092232201?t=roOIvLOTxr0l6XoLHqe2iA&s=19

Because Biden is president, the federal government is now a liberal communist agenda and any arm of it is not to be trusted. You can quote CDC numbers until you're blue in the face, anti vaxxers will simply say those numbers are fake.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply