How about the fact that California withdrew their firearms ban for anyone who lives in public housing? Public housing is for those who're low income, people who can't really afford to have a home or an apartment. If California public housing ban was fully constitutional, then they never would've withdrawn it from the books, because they were right in having it in place.

Then there's also the fact that absolutely nowhere in the Constitution is there any sort of language that would suggest the Bill of Rights is to be reserved exclusively for those that're rich.

Or maybe the fact that the federal government hasn't established a poverty line, and everybody below that line is barred from owning a gun before they're too poor to qualify?

Article IV, Clause 2 of the Constitution:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

The Supreme Court has said that any law that dictates firearms must be locked away or rendered inoperable is unconstitutional for infringing on self defense. And since this was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that means that the ruling trickles down to all 50 states. Laws that require locking up firearms to keep out of the hands of children, and thus making them inaccessible to adults as well, are unconstitutional. And if we need another lawsuit to set this standard then so be it; it doesn't change the fact that the Supremacy Clause, combined with the Heller ruling, negate state authorized safe storage laws.

It's far easier for a person to get their gun from a drawer to confront a home invader or attacker, than it is to get to: get to the safe, remember the exact combination, input it correctly, get their gun out, get their ammunition out, load the magazine, put the magazine into the gun, chamber a round, and THEN confront the person. It's possible to temporarily disable an attacker, giving you a few needed seconds to get to your gun in the nightstand drawer or dresser. The same can't be said for having to retrieve it from the safe.

The same reason that doctors give their patients placebos; the psychological affect. Everybody intelligent knows that no lock is going to prevent a determined individual from getting into your home. You yourself said that 60% of home robberies occur when the people weren't at home. How many of those 60% locked their doors and discovered that the lock did them no good?

If more than half of all robberies carried out in a single year can't be prevented with locking mechanisms, that doesn't inspire any confidence in me that mandatory safe storage laws are gonna do any better.

__________________
[QUOTE=Brady;363469]When I was a kid I did lots of things like playing with fire and torturing animals even though adults told me not to.[/QUOTE]
The admission of a sociopathic serial killer.

[QUOTE=Penfold;363126]No Personal attacks, insults, name calling, offensive generalizations, or labeling.[/QUOTE]
He should practice what he preaches.

The three duties of government: 1. Protect property 2. preserve contracts 3. provide for the rule of law.

Did they pass out guns?

Nor is there language that exercising your rights will always be free.

WTH?

Right. Therefore safe storage laws that don't preclude immediate self-defense would be legit. "Reasonable" gun control laws. They said as much. Read.

A one-touch safe with a loaded weapon inside?

Bull. It's to prevent easy opportunity.

Should banks forego vaults since banks are routinely robbed?

Then refute the reduction in gun theft associated with safe storage laws previously posted by me and avoided by you.

__________________
"I am to eliminate all free radicals."
- James Bond

Ensuring that the people can freely own guns, by supplying them to everyone, isn't the job of the government.

Where exactly are you finding grounds for assuming that the exercising of rights is a caste-based system, or will soon become such?

The government hasn't said "only the rich have rights", suggesting that such a concept isn't likely to occur.

And how exactly is "immediate self-defense" determined? Does your attacker have to be outside your front door for it to be ruled as immediate? Or do they have to be inside or right on top of you? Is a stalking ex calling you up and saying that they're coming to kill you immediate enough to warrant having a gun out and ready?

There's no definition of what qualifies as "immediate self defense", nor should there be. Self defense in general is more than a reasonable standard.

The Supreme Court said that gun control laws have to be reasonable, however they didn't say what is reasonable, setting up another lawsuit.

Not good enough. Seconds mean lives here.

Well if a locked door is sufficient enough to prevent opportunity-based robberies, then they provide sufficient theft deterrence to keep guns from being stolen from their owners. Good enough for protecting your jewelry and cash on hand, good enough for your guns as well.

If locked doors aren't sufficient for stopping thieves from stealing guns, then that means they're not targets of opportunity, they're being robbed by determined individuals who know what they're doing and prepared to use force to carry out the mission.

The difference is that bank customers don't pay the cost of the vault. The security of that bank vault is provided free of charge to all bank customers; it's not a government mandated storage feature that all customers must shell out their hard-earned money for.

First, I want to see concrete proof that the reduction in numbers is factual and from a reliable source, not from the Brady Twits.

Second, I want evidence from the time after safe storage laws were mandated, and from an equal amount of time before the laws were mandated.

__________________
[QUOTE=Brady;363469]When I was a kid I did lots of things like playing with fire and torturing animals even though adults told me not to.[/QUOTE]
The admission of a sociopathic serial killer.

[QUOTE=Penfold;363126]No Personal attacks, insults, name calling, offensive generalizations, or labeling.[/QUOTE]
He should practice what he preaches.

The three duties of government: 1. Protect property 2. preserve contracts 3. provide for the rule of law.

Dude! Lock Up Your Dangerous Implements First! And I mean all of your Bomb making materials too. Lead by example! Not by mandating arbitrary specific laws on just one product! Is it a safety issue or not?

And I also mean the Large, heavy, expensive safe too!

Now I already know that you think this is a BS example, but Just Ask England about their Knife Crime Problem and if they think this is BS or a Joke!

London's Operation Blunt I don't think they would be particularly amused by your indifference to the knife crime problems or its lethality.

All of these laws exist in Australia and England, and criminals still get an amazing amount of guns, not to mention the spiraling knife substitutions either.

Weapons sell for just £50 as suspects and victims grow ever younger Shotguns for £50: study reveals weapons culture Australian Institute of Criminology study -- Tough new weapons laws 'miss hard core of criminal underworld' Now for your Bomb making materials. Luckily the Columbine pair were totally inept at perfecting timers or this would have been a disaster the size and scope of 9/11.
The Depressive and the Psychopath I think the final tally of bombs recovered was 93.

Come On! Be Reasonable! Compromise!

If a crook wanted to steal a gun, why not go where he knows the guns are? Just steal them from the police.

Come On Tither. Don't give us ridiculous arguments!
Guns stolen from HoCo police cars Police officer's uniform, badge, gun stolen

Guns stolen from sheriff's patrol car L.A. officer's purse, badge, gun stolen

Seattle Police Chief's Gun Stolen

Gun Stolen From D.C. Officer Used In Crimes

Australia Gun, handcuffs, capsicum spray stolen from police car

England Stolen police cruiser found; gun missing

Or if you don’t want to steal the guns from the police just wait for a power outage and stop over at the gun store.
30 guns stolen during power outage
Canada
The theft of about 130 handguns from an Orchards gun shop

Cleveland police commander's home robbed, gun stolen

Man! If we could just get those lazy careless Constitution believing citizens to just be more careful and lock up their guns, all of this crime problems would be solved! Or would they?

I gotta tell you. This was way too easy to find in a google search. I hope this points out what we are dealing with. If crooks want a gun they will get it. Or they will just starting importing them in with their already illegal drugs like England and Australia does.

Condescension doesn't become you and good morning.

"The number of gun-related deaths went down from 55 to 49 in the year to September 2007. Incidents involving serious injury also fell, by 16%."
Crime rate falling ever faster, but drug and gun offences increase | UK news | The Guardian

"Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in England and Wales is very low – less than 0.5% of all crime recorded by the police."
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-v...ime/gun-crime/

__________________
"I am to eliminate all free radicals."
- James Bond

Notice how not one of your examples involves guns properly secured as I have suggested? Even the gunshops had nothing more than glass between the thieves and the weapons. Shameful.

"Cleveland Police Commander Wayne Drummond had his city-issued 9 mm Glock, fully-loaded clips, mace and police baton stolen last week when teens broke into his house in the city's southeast side when he wasn't home."

"The Glock 17 was stolen in January from Lt. Teresa Brown, who is serving a 30-day suspension for being careless with her firearm."

"thieves broke in through a small side window in the back of the business, in an area the gun shop owner rents to a dog groomer, the chief said."

__________________
"I am to eliminate all free radicals."
- James Bond

Then it would be safe to assume that these robberies weren't opportunistic thefts, since you said locks deter such incidents. It's safe to assume that these were highly organized and pre-planned incidents where the thieves knew what they were doing.

__________________
[QUOTE=Brady;363469]When I was a kid I did lots of things like playing with fire and torturing animals even though adults told me not to.[/QUOTE]
The admission of a sociopathic serial killer.

[QUOTE=Penfold;363126]No Personal attacks, insults, name calling, offensive generalizations, or labeling.[/QUOTE]
He should practice what he preaches.

The three duties of government: 1. Protect property 2. preserve contracts 3. provide for the rule of law.

I don't think so. The cops purse was likely sitting on the seat of her car. One of the gunshops was robbed during a power failure, a different sort of opportunity.
And then there's this: "They also snatched a video-game system and DVD player."
And: "Police said the thief probably would not have known it was a police car, or known what was inside."

Only the Vancouver gunshop seems to have been an organized theft and that was accomplished by simply breaking a window.

You understand the difference between deter and prevent, yes? I said one locks one's door to prevent an easy opportunity. Once someone is in your house to steal whatever they can, finding and stealing your gun is a crime of opportunity. One that can be prevented except in cases of intruders with power tools and plenty of time. That's not your average burglar.

__________________
"I am to eliminate all free radicals."
- James Bond

No society can control crime by jailing the victims of crime. No matter how many laws one makes, criminals can and will get past them!

Thieves are able to rob banks! Thieves can just as easily walk into a gun store and pull out guns and Take as many as they can carry.

Where does one stop in trying to control the law-abiding? England even went as far as this.
Ban on imitation Samurai swords And all of that control led to their new crime fighting policy.
Three Strikes and You're ... in Like Flint Which led to this.
3m crimes a year 'left out of official figures' Honestly I don't see it! Gun control is not crime control.

England.
KNIFINGS AND SHOOTINGS UP AS MURDER RATE SOARS So don't mind if we just do not jump on the bandwagon.

What I mind is your ignoring my responses to your C/P frenzy.

"Figures show 608 homicides in England and Wales in 1997-98, compared to 734 for 2006-07 – the latest year for which complete information is available."

sinjin - The rate went up to be sure but "soaring" is hyperbole. 126 more people in 06-07 as compared to 97-98. My city probably has had more people killed since January 1st.

Read some of this:

untitled

__________________
"I am to eliminate all free radicals."
- James Bond

"The number of apparent gun homicides(2008) was the lowest for at least twenty years.

There were 42 apparent homicides reported during 2008 (this includes one that took place on 31 December 2007), 41 in England and Wales and 1 in Scotland. The corresponding figures for 2007 were 51 and 4, respectively."

Gun Incident Summary - December 2008

Average number of annual firearm homicides in the US = 10,821
US population approx. 282 million vs UK population approx 61 million.

__________________
"I am to eliminate all free radicals."
- James Bond

And as far as steak knifes needing to be secured:

"...a study in The Journal of Trauma (36:4 pp516-524) looked at all injury admissions to a Seattle hospital over a six year period. The mortality rate for gunshot wounds was 22% while that for stab wounds was 4%."
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/1994...ives-00002.php

__________________
"I am to eliminate all free radicals."
- James Bond

Well, I use a safe to hold lots of property, and this includes guns that I do not rely upon for self-defense. I do so because I feel it deters theft and also protects my guns, my papers, and my other valuables from fire damage. I think it is a good idea to have one if you can afford it, and I recommend it to everyone. But, it is one thing for me to say you should—and it is quite another for the government to say you must.

I’m just going to have to agree to disagree on this issue Sinjin. An anti-theft law runs counter to my understanding of a core principle of our system of criminal justice—we do not punish the innocent for the crimes of the guilty. An anti-theft storage law threatens to turn burglary victims into criminals. Such a law would serve to deter the reporting of a burglary by persons who did not have their guns stored in accordance with the wishes of government. For them, the law would provide an incentive to ignore the criminal justice system and instead try to recover their property by means of vigilante “street justice.” A law which encourages this is just not good policy in my opinion.

In my opinion laws mandating reporting of gun thefts are also ill advised. Such a law also threatens to criminalize the burglary victim. The only purpose I can see for this policy goal is a belief that it would increase the number of immediate reports of burglaries and thereby aid in the recovery of stolen firearms. But in my experience I just do not see a problem with guns not being reported stolen from homes. In my experience homeowners report all property stolen as soon as they realize it. Guns are no exception. Guns are just like expensive jewelry and high-end electronics—they have tremendous value. Homeowners either want their guns back or someone to pay for the value of the loss. Many home insurance policies require a report to the police before stolen guns will be covered. A court will not order restitution for property which was not reported stolen, and I have never yet met a homeowner who didn’t want someone else, be it the insurance company or the convicted burglar, to pay for the loss when they go to court. In my experience home burglaries are already nearly always reported within minutes of their discovery—and unless a known suspect is developed quickly the guns are rarely is ever recovered. I do not see how a mandatory reporting law would increase the percentage of immediate burglary reports or the percentage of recovered firearms. Finally, there already exists a tremendous incentive for reporting a stolen gun. Even in cases where the gun is not immediately recovered, if it is found three years later hidden under a bed in a crack house raid then law enforcement is obligated to return the gun back to the one who reported it stolen. Stolen guns are entered into NCIC, and I have seen guns returned to owners that are recovered years later in other states.

Now are there cases of guns being stolen in burglaries which go unreported? Yes. These cases almost always involve guns held by persons who can’t lawfully have them in the first place. For these people (felons, etc), the fear of being prosecuted for having the gun in the first place deters them from making a burglary report ( it is similar to the fear an otherwise innocent homeowner would have of being prosecuted for reporting a stolen gun which he did not have secured in a manner approved by an anti-theft storage law). These individuals are the ones who are most likely to try instead to get restitution for their loss by engaging in private “street justice.” They simply will not incriminate themselves by reporting the stolen gun anymore than a drug dealer will call the police to report that someone broke in and stole all his cocaine—and no law can force them to do so.