Law Alabama House committee OKs bill requiring safe storage of firearms

[spamking]

How do you enforce this prior to some kind of incident?

Exactly.

 

[BFoe]

I would say there is both good and bad in this legislation. Locking up the guns is smart if kids ever come into the house, but I am not a fan of the govt telling me how to exercise my second amendment rights to keep and bare arms

Here’s the thing though, and I’ll sound like a broken record to anyone who’s read my 2A posts before:

States had laws like this in colonial times, in our major cities, and no one thought they were unconstitutional.

There were laws about how you had to store your weapons, how to store your gunpowder, how much gunpowder you could own, how much gunpowder you could have on hand in the home (these amounts were different because of the safety risk of flammability in the home)… all sorts of stuff. And it wasn’t little villages with these laws I’m talking about, it was major cities like Boston, Philadelphia, and New York.

Our Founding Fathers lived in those cities, and none objected to the laws; no citizens ever sued because they thought the laws were unconstitutional, to my knowledge. We didn’t have a 2A SCOTUS case for nearly 100 years after the Constitution was ratified.

I have a gut feeling that this AL law would be struck down in light of Heller though, which is just amazing.

 

[Lucas1980]

I have a gut feeling that this AL law would be struck down in light of Heller though, which is just amazing.

Hopefully it is struck down...Not "AMAZING" at all...laughing.

 

[Lucas1980]

Maybe there can be a law put in place where if a young scholar shoots someone and the illegal gun was stored in the house the Grandma or MaMa living there should be held accountable as well.... Its their responsibility to know what their kid has in the house. But some folks will cry "Wacism".

 

[spamking]

States had laws like this in colonial times, in our major cities, and no one thought they were unconstitutional.

No one at the time? Or no one until a certain date within the last 100 years?

I've always thought the education level of the populace at the time and how often information was available may have played a role in how often something like this may have been challenged.

And wouldn't the construction materials used influence how gunpowder was to be stored?

 

[BFoe]

Hopefully it is struck down...Not "AMAZING" at all...laughing.

What’s amazing is how the SCOTUS has completely bastardized and reimagined the 2A in the past 15 years or so. The damage they’ve done to this country is hard to understate, and as we watch our states left basically powerless to take any reasonable action related to firearms while innocent people continue to be gunned down, it’s really nothing to laugh about.

No one at the time? Or no one until a certain date within the last 100 years?

No one from 1792 until about 2008, AFAIK. Not on those types of issues (firearm storage laws) anyhow. I am aware of a concealed weapons type of case regarding a Bowie knife making it to the Tennessee State Supreme Court in 1840 (Aymette vs State of Tennessee), which may be the earliest case of a “2A variety” making it to any sort of Supreme Court.
—The verdict they reached would not please modern 2A proponents.

I've always thought the education level of the populace at the time and how often information was available may have played a role in how often something like this may have been challenged.

And wouldn't the construction materials used influence how gunpowder was to be stored?

Firstly, literacy was actually surprisingly high in colonial America—like 90% or higher. Even on the frontier it was estimated to be 70% or higher. They not only read their Bibles, but things like the philosophy of Locke and Paine which influenced pre-Revolution thought, and the common man in most places could and did read The Federalist Papers.
John Adams once said that “finding someone who couldn’t read was as rare as a comet.”

Speaking of John Adams, he was alive and living in Massachusetts (he had properties in Boston and Quincy) at the exact time they passed their gunpowder storage law in 1801. Paul Revere lived there as well, and John Quincy Adams moved there in like 1803 or so, just a couple of years after the gunpowder storage law was passed. The reason none of them challenged the law is simple: no one thought it to be unconstitutional—because it wasn’t. Likewise I think it stretches the imagination to think that MA would ratify the 2A in 1792, yet turn around and pass an “unconstitutional” gunpowder storage law just 9 years later. It just simply wasn’t the case that people thought the law violated the 2A in some way.

And sure, how gunpowder or weapons might need to be stored might vary over time depending on construction materials. But the underlying principle is the same: the state has the right to regulate the storage of firearms and ammunition for the benefit of the safety of the citizenry.

 

[terrapin]

I own three guns but we keep them all in safes and I think it's a really great law because people are too reckless with their guns. They say they're responsible gun owners but most people are lying frankly, and just hoping nothing bad ever happens. I think a law that can prosecute you if something bad happens is a wonderful law.

My cousin is a pretty great guy and trustworthy in every respect but we were bringing our daughter over to his house just to visit and she went into his room and I thought what's she doing so I went to check and she had gotten in his closet. She didn't touch the gun but there was a loaded shotgun just leaning against the wall in his closet and that's freaking crazy and that's not a responsible gun owner.

I think a law that allows you to prosecute gun owners who don't have their guns secured when there's kids around is a great law. The only thing is I wish that the punishment was a lot worse. I think the punishment basically should match the crime done with the gun.

 

[Lucas1980]

What’s amazing is how the SCOTUS has completely bastardized and reimagined the 2A in the past 15 years or so. The damage they’ve done to this country is hard to understate, and as we watch our states left basically powerless to take any reasonable action related to firearms while innocent people continue to be gunned down, it’s really nothing to laugh about.

"People gunned down" Laughing.....Yeah the majority of them with illegal guns no laws would've prevented.
Firearm Homicides rate per 100,000

US Black 19.8
US Hispanic 6.4
Finland 3.3
US 1.7

There's no problem with firearms in America.....There's a cultural Problem in certain communities
OECD, WHO, CDC

 

[Lucas1980]

I own three guns but we keep them all in safes and I think it's a really great law because people are too reckless with their guns. They say they're responsible gun owners but most people are lying frankly, and just hoping nothing bad ever happens. I think a law that can prosecute you if something bad happens is a wonderful law.

My cousin is a pretty great guy and trustworthy in every respect but we were bringing our daughter over to his house just to visit and she went into his room and I thought what's she doing so I went to check and she had gotten in his closet. She didn't touch the gun but there was a loaded shotgun just leaning against the wall in his closet and that's freaking crazy and that's not a responsible gun owner.

I think a law that allows you to prosecute gun owners who don't have their guns secured when there's kids around is a great law. The only thing is I wish that the punishment was a lot worse. I think the punishment basically should match the crime done with the gun.

So at nighttime do you still keep your guns locked away in a safe or do you at least keep a couple by your bedside?

 

[spamking]

No one from 1792 until about 2008, AFAIK. Not on those types of issues (firearm storage laws) anyhow. I am aware of a concealed weapons type of case regarding a Bowie knife making it to the Tennessee State Supreme Court in 1840 (Aymette vs State of Tennessee), which may be the earliest case of a “2A variety” making it to any sort of Supreme Court.
—The verdict they reached would not please modern 2A proponents.

I guess it's a good thing Heller looped in the Bowie knife as protected by the 2A.

Firstly, literacy was actually surprisingly high in colonial America—like 90% or higher. Even on the frontier it was estimated to be 70% or higher. They not only read their Bibles, but things like the philosophy of Locke and Paine which influenced pre-Revolution thought, and the common man in most places could and did read The Federalist Papers.
John Adams once said that “finding someone who couldn’t read was as rare as a comet.”

I'm sure folks in Colonial America were more educated, but I'd suspect as folks moved west that number dwindled greatly.

Speaking of John Adams, he was alive and living in Massachusetts (he had properties in Boston and Quincy) at the exact time they passed their gunpowder storage law in 1801. Paul Revere lived there as well, and John Quincy Adams moved there in like 1803 or so, just a couple of years after the gunpowder storage law was passed. The reason none of them challenged the law is simple: no one thought it to be unconstitutional—because it wasn’t. Likewise I think it stretches the imagination to think that MA would ratify the 2A in 1792, yet turn around and pass an “unconstitutional” gunpowder storage law just 9 years later. It just simply wasn’t the case that people thought the law violated the 2A in some way.

And sure, how gunpowder or weapons might need to be stored might vary over time depending on construction materials. But the underlying principle is the same: the state has the right to regulate the storage of firearms and ammunition for the benefit of the safety of the citizenry.

I think it's safe to say they likely didn't think it violated the 2A because of the construction materials used at the time and the risks posed due to one idiot setting off a chain reaction of fires because of how they stored something flammable.

They were more concerned about burning an entire city block down instead of some potential 2A violation.

Either way, times have changed and so have attitudes towards what is or isn't a 2A violation.

 

[terrapin]

So at nighttime do you still keep your guns locked away in a safe or do you at least keep a couple by your bedside?

We put an alarm system on the house to give us pre-warning and we have a couple dogs and so we feel like that gives us time to release them out of the quick release safes that we have our guns in and we have two of those.

The pistol is right on the nightstand in a quick release safe and the shotgun and .22 and another pistol I forgot to mention is in a rifle safe that's fingerprint unlock also.

I feel very confident that there's enough time.

I also have a heavy duty thick steel machete that is more like a cleaver sitting right by the bed that one of us can hold while we're getting the gun out.

And we were surprised how cheap those kind of safes are. I thought they would be expensive but they are certainly not.

 

[emefer]

I am all for the safe storage of guns. Mine would be in a gun safe, or quick bio-metric lock box, if I had not lost them all in a boating accident.

lol
And I thought Noem shared too much.

 

[Lucas1980]

We put an alarm system on the house to give us pre-warning and we have a couple dogs and so we feel like that gives us time to release them out of the quick release safes that we have our guns in and we have two of those.

The pistol is right on the nightstand in a quick release safe and the shotgun and .22 and another pistol I forgot to mention is in a rifle safe that's fingerprint unlock also.

I feel very confident that there's enough time.

I also have a heavy duty thick steel machete that is more like a cleaver sitting right by the bed that one of us can hold while we're getting the gun out.

And we were surprised how cheap those kind of safes are. I thought they would be expensive but they are certainly not.

Nice...Set Up Brother. I lived in "urban" area for a while and I remember dudes I ran with would walk past their moms on several occasions carrying guns anything from .22's to AK 47's . These moms and grandmas knew that had illegal guns in the house...my question is if these kids commit crimes and murder people with those guns do you think the parents should be held accountable as well?

 

[USA!USA!]

I own a gun and I own a safe. It was inexpensive. I don't see what the problem is with this. Guns aren't toys to be displayed out in the open. It really isn't asking for much.

 

[BFoe]

I guess it's a good thing Heller looped in the Bowie knife as protected by the 2A.

It would be an example of yet another thing Heller got wrong. The Aymette case is very important actually, because it’s the earliest example of a Supreme Court (state court in this case) defining what “keep and bear arms” actually means. Bizarrely, the so-called SCOTUS “originalists” in 2008 saw it completely differently. Strange how that works.

m sure folks in Colonial America were more educated, but I'd suspect as folks moved west that number dwindled greatly.

I don’t think it did actually, the vast majority of people in the Old West could read at a basic level, at least. But again, for the purpose of this conversation, I’m discussing firearms storage laws in states that were part of the original 13 colonies. The same states that originally ratified the 2A, states with high literacy, states where our Founding Fathers and their descendents lived.

I think it's safe to say they likely didn't think it violated the 2A because of the construction materials used at the time and the risks posed due to one idiot setting off a chain reaction of fires because of how they stored something flammable.

They were more concerned about burning an entire city block down instead of some potential 2A violation.

Either way, times have changed and so have attitudes towards what is or isn't a 2A violation.

Your first paragraph here seems to just be saying what I said: States historically had the right to regulate storage of firearms for the safety of their citizens. It doesn’t matter if the issue is burning down a block, or little Billy taking a gun to school and shooting up a classroom.

What specific things amendments apply to can change over time: e.g., freedom of the press applying to radio, TV, or internet.
What *shouldn’t* be changing is the way the amendment operates.
Even the question of incorporation of the 2A to the states via the 14th Amendment was addressed by SCOTUS within a few years of the ratification of the 14th Amendment.

It’s obvious and apparent that if a whole bunch of laws which wouldn’t be considered unconstitutional from 1792-2010, suddenly are seen as unconstitutional from 2010-present, something has gone terribly wrong.

 

[nhbbear]

Here’s the thing though, and I’ll sound like a broken record to anyone who’s read my 2A posts before:

States had laws like this in colonial times, in our major cities, and no one thought they were unconstitutional.

There were laws about how you had to store your weapons, how to store your gunpowder, how much gunpowder you could own, how much gunpowder you could have on hand in the home (these amounts were different because of the safety risk of flammability in the home)… all sorts of stuff. And it wasn’t little villages with these laws I’m talking about, it was major cities like Boston, Philadelphia, and New York.

Our Founding Fathers lived in those cities, and none objected to the laws; no citizens ever sued because they thought the laws were unconstitutional, to my knowledge. We didn’t have a 2A SCOTUS case for nearly 100 years after the Constitution was ratified.

I have a gut feeling that this AL law would be struck down in light of Heller though, which is just amazing.

What you say is reasonable. But I am pretty sure that no one was going to farmer Ted and telling him he was storing his powder wrong and threatening to prosecute him over it. So it was more like suggestions back then.

If the left had their way, and could make all guns disappear with a snap of fingers, they would do that. The right knows this, so they fight every gun control law they can.

My biggest issue is that gun control crowd will prosecute a normal, everyday law abiding citizen for any infraction when it comes to guns but they won’t even consider enforcing harsher penalties on criminals. In fact, george gascon got rid of gun enhancements and gang enhancements in violent crimes. Why? Because it affects minorities too much. But he would have no issue prosecuting your neighbor bill if he didn’t store his guns correctly.

 

[Rob Battisti]

@Andy Capp don’t be scared, homie.

 

[Whippy McGee]

lol
And I thought Noem shared too much.

lol... I thought everyone knew the old, "my guns got lost in a boating accident" line.

 

[Rob Battisti]

lol... I thought everyone knew the old, "my guns got lost in a boating accident" line.

lol apparently not those on the far left

 

[spamking]

It would be an example of yet another thing Heller got wrong. The Aymette case is very important actually, because it’s the earliest example of a Supreme Court (state court in this case) defining what “keep and bear arms” actually means. Bizarrely, the so-called SCOTUS “originalists” in 2008 saw it completely differently. Strange how that works.

Thankfully Heller was ruled like it was . . . Since that court ruled the 2A guarantees the right to "keep and bear arms" you're cool with everyone carrying openly then?

I don’t think it did actually, the vast majority of people in the Old West could read at a basic level, at least. But again, for the purpose of this conversation, I’m discussing firearms storage laws in states that were part of the original 13 colonies. The same states that originally ratified the 2A, states with high literacy, states where our Founding Fathers and their descendents lived.

As spread out as things got and with so few schools, etc. I'm not sure I see how the literacy rate was the same in the West as it was in one of the original colonies.

Your first paragraph here seems to just be saying what I said: States historically had the right to regulate storage of firearms for the safety of their citizens. It doesn’t matter if the issue is burning down a block, or little Billy taking a gun to school and shooting up a classroom.

I disagree that gunpowder is the same as a firearm, but we disagree a lot of things.

What specific things amendments apply to can change over time: e.g., freedom of the press applying to radio, TV, or internet.
What *shouldn’t* be changing is the way the amendment operates.
Even the question of incorporation of the 2A to the states via the 14th Amendment was addressed by SCOTUS within a few years of the ratification of the 14th Amendment.

It’s obvious and apparent that if a whole bunch of laws which wouldn’t be considered unconstitutional from 1792-2010, suddenly are seen as unconstitutional from 2010-present, something has gone terribly wrong.

Meh . . . things are progressing as they should. We don't need the government to dictate a lot of things to us today. Especially when we have judges like that one in NY that said "Do not bring the Second Amendment into this courtroom. It doesn’t exist here. So you can’t argue Second Amendment. This is New York."