Regulating guns in the home: how far to go?
I wrote about the Colin Gray case yesterday in this post, and a discussion ensued about gun rights and laws requiring a person to lock up guns in the home.
Commenter “Brian E” commented by describing a local school shooting and the tragedy that ensued, and added: “Having seen the aftermath relatively close up, it’s hard to have infringement of personal liberty as the hill to die on.”
Later, he added:
I agree with Neo, he [the killer’s father, Colin Gray] should have been charged with negligence, not homicide– but I do think the sentence needs to be serious enough that people change their behavior on how they store their firearms.
Many or perhaps most laws that restrict liberty are rationalized as being necessary and/or desirable in order to protect the innocent. The problem is how far to go, because at a certain point the infringements become unconscionable, and perhaps they don’t even prevent the behavior. These are constant issues, and not just in the field of gun control.
Arguments about the protective benefit of a restrictive law are nearly always used to justify infringements of personal liberty . There are terrible tragedies that appear to be preventable through restrictions on personal liberty. In the case of Colt Gray (the 14-year-old murderer) and his father Colin (who failed to lock up weapons), however, there was no law in Georgia that required such a locking-up. I see the harsh verdict in the Colin Gray trial as an attempt to rectify that, ex post facto, without actually passing such a law. In the service of this effort, another law – one I see as inappropriate to the facts of the case – was pulled into service in order to label one person, the father, as responsible.
The desire to turn back the clock and undo what happened – an impossibility, of course – is part of the motive behind this. The other desire is the one stated by Brian E, which is for the sentence “to be serious enough that people change their behavior on how they store their firearms.” But I doubt that will happen; people think they’re safe and their family is safe, and they don’t foresee what is an extremely unlikely act: that of their child committing mass murder with a gun found around the house. Or, for many who do foresee or at least imagine such possibilities, they either are already locking up their weapons or not owning them in the first place.
In addition: where does this assigning of responsibility stop? In the Colt Gray case, why not the mother, the school, the police? They all had roles and all failed to fulfill them effectively enough to prevent the murders; some were even arguably negligent (the school, for example). And one could argue that the school authorities possessed more training than Colt’s father Colin had, more resources than he had, and supposedly more objectivity about Colt than he had. For that matter, why not blame the school for not using metal detectors?
There’s also an assumption that if the guns had been locked up Colt couldn’t or wouldn’t have killed people. I agree that it almost certainly would have been more difficult for him to do so, but it still could have been accomplished. He could have used a knife. He could have used explosives. He could have bought a gun on the black market or stolen one. Where there’s a will …
If a state or city wants to require people to lock up their guns, it can do so. If someone fails to follow the law, impose the penalty for violation of that law rather than twisting another law around in order to punish someone you have designated as the one to blame even though everyone is to blame.
SCOTUS has ruled on how much can be required of homeowners regarding gun storage – that is, it has ruled on what cannot be required. The case was District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) (see this):
Provisions of the District of Columbia Code made it illegal to carry an unregistered firearm … The Code also contained provisions that required owners of lawfully registered firearms to keep them unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or other similar device unless the firearms were located in a place of business or being used for legal recreational activities. …
[Heller] sought an injunction against the enforcement of the relevant parts of the Code and argued that they violated his Second Amendment right to keep a functional firearm in his home without a license. The district court dismissed the complaint. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed and held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep firearms in the home for the purpose of self-defense, and the District of Columbia’s requirement that firearms kept in the home be nonfunctional violated that right.
So the appeals court ruled that the requirements were too strict and effectively disarmed people, making it impossible to use their guns for self-defense. The case ultimately went to SCOTUS and its ruling was 5-4, which is about as close as it can be. The ruling divided along the usual political lines. The majority basically agreed with the need for self-defense and claimed the 2nd Amendment protected that right, whereas the dissenting minority went with the “militia” interpretation and did not think this case unduly limited the right to bear arms because that right only applied to militias or militia-equivalents. SCOTUS has since declined to rule further on the issue of laws about gun locks in the home, which leaves those laws standing. I believe the idea at present is that some restrictions are okay as long as they preserve the right to self-defense.
NOTE: Once again I am reminded of the chilling poem by A. E. Housman, “The Culprit.” Regarding the Gray case, the poem is somewhat ironic, because Colin the father is being punished (15 years), although the son Colt still drew the harsher sentence (life without parole):
THE CULPRIT
The night my father got me
His mind was not on me;
He did not plague his fancy
To muse if I should be
The son you see.The day my mother bore me
She was a fool and glad,
For all the pain I cost her,
That she had borne the lad
That borne she had.My mother and my father
Out of the light they lie;
The warrant would not find them,
And here ’tis only I
Shall hang so high.Oh let not man remember
The soul that God forgot,
But fetch the county kerchief
And noose me in the knot,
And I will rot.For so the game is ended
That should not have begun.
My father and my mother
They had a likely son,
And I have none.
Adam Lanza broke into his mom’s weapon safe. Should she have been prosecuted if she’d lived? An inadequate safe…..?
When the Crubley family were in the school, refusing to take their son home, nobody checked his back pack. One teacher in a nearby school said it’s not allowed for teachers. So either they didn’t think to or lacked the moral courage. But the prosecutor said none of the school personnel would be prosecuted..
I suspect this will be reserved for “People Not Like Us, Dear”. And, as someone asked, will it apply to black moms?
There are other benefits to safe storage laws besides making it harder for a juvenile to access a gun for homicides/school shootings.
Unintentional shootings by children and younger teens: These often involve very easy access (nightstand, closet, under mattress).
Youth firearm suicides: Impulsive acts are sensitive to time and effort barriers; a safe that takes longer to open can interrupt the attempt.
Washington state has a “safe storage” law. A criminal liability is only triggered if the firearm is used to injure or kill, or it is used to intimidate other people by a “prohibited person”– which includes anyone under 18.
In the Gray case the penalty would be up to 5 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine (RCW 9A.20.021).
There is a lesser penalty if the prohibited person uses the firearm to intimidate people or uses it to commit a crime. That penalty is up to 364 days in jail and/or a $5,000 fine.
The law doesn’t actually specify where or how the gun should be stored, only that it becomes a crime if a prohibited person gains access or uses it. Trigger guards are considered safe storage– which aren’t particularly successful against a teen bent on shooting someone, but would be effective against the more likely use of a gun by a juvenile– accidental/playing with the gun or suicide.
I use a small safe for a few handguns. My primary concern would be accidents with inquisitive little tots. I don’t have many little kids in my house, but I have had such visitors on rare occasions.
However, it’s not much of a safe. It was on the CA approved list when I bought it. A teenager with an appropriate pry bar could open it with some effort. Also, it’s not bolted down either. A thief could abscond with it for later dismantling.
The law [in Washington state] doesn’t actually specify where or how the gun should be stored, only that it becomes a crime if a prohibited person gains access or uses it. — Brian E
Really!? Yet another reason not to live in Washington state. And I live in California (cough, cough). I would hope that there are some mitigating clauses tucked away inside that statute. That is, mitigating the rank unfairness and lack of justice it would imply.
Not that long ago (2015) California was pretty reasonable with its gun laws. Then, there was a weird law banning the standard magazine release button for AR-15’s only and some limitations on which hand guns you could buy. Now, the onerous problem is buying ammunition. There are considerable hoops and expenses involved with each and every purchase.
Brian E–you couldn’t be more wrong at 5:53. If someone, even a teen, wants to kill himself, there are infinite ways to do so, not just firearms, so if the gun is locked up they’ll find another way.
Your straw man statement that making it more difficult to get the gun will save them is made up fantasy. Where there’s a will there’s a way.
Neo, we lived in New Zealand for 4 years–gun laws are very strict there–hard to get a firearm, especially a handgun, and it must be disassembled with parts in different areas of the house and no ammo stored with any part of the gun. So, effectively useless as a home defense method.
Many murders were with machetes.
When we lived in Shanghai, the Chinese’ favored mass killing weapon was the big meat cleaver-like knives they use in the kitchen. Many school killings where crazed older men would attack schools and slash children and teachers alike to death. They’d get a score or more victims before they could be subdued.
We had a tragedy in our family 40 years ago when my older sister’s grandson who was 14, the same age as mine was out shooting baskets with a few other friends and they started talking about guns. The kid, that’s what I’ll call him, told his buddies I’ll show you a real gun and he brought out his father’s 357 Magnum Revolver. The smart ass kid told his buddy close by that he would scare the other boys and then he said, “watch this”. The kid removed all but one bullet from the cylinder and he thought he knew which way it would turn if it was in a dangerous spot, he spun the cylinder and held the gun up to his head and pulled the trigger and he was wrong, dead wrong about which way the cylinder would spin. That was a sad Saturday morning when his parents were returning from Christmas shopping and saw a bunch of police and an ambulance at the end of their cut de sac where they lived.
Young men and guns can be dangerous I stored one pistol, locked up when my son was young and I purchased ammunition when we were on our way out to shoot and we would shot all of it up before we came back home. When my son was in college and lived up in Colorado he had my old .22 rifle and he did a bit of shooting with it then. My son had been through a Boy Scout hunter safety class and he knew enough when he was over 18 to store and take care of his rifle. Now at 54 years old my son does a lot of 3-Gun and Steel Challenge completion over several states and he runs some the competitions. He has a 13 year old daughter who has her own .22 rifle that like the rest of his guns is kept locked up in a gun safe until they go out to shoot.
As for my house, when my grandsons still lived in our town I always had all of my guns locked up and now I do keep one pistol close to my bed and the rest of my guns are always under lock and key when I leave the house, carrying my one loaded pistol with me. Allowing young people access to any type of fire arm is always a risk, a bad day for most adults is just a bad day and a bad day for a young teenager may be such a disaster that it is perceived to be the end of the world. At times it does become the end of lots of other folks world when the feelings are acted out.
I am a current NRA Range Safety Officer and I help out with matches and I have taught a lot of young folks how to safely use guns. For the past several years my granddaughter who lives in Colorado has come down to Abilene, Texas for out annual dove hunt, using her over/under .410 which is hard to use she drops a few birds each year and she is great cleaning birds for all us old folks. She has respect for guns and wildlife and that’s important to pass own down to each generation.
I am all for teaching youngsters how to shoot and I also know it is important for the parents to control the situations where and when they shoot and access to all fire arms at all times. This is a different world from my younger days when I could come home from school in the 7th grade, pick up my single shot .22 and walk out of town to shoot rabbits. I felt kind of great when I would bring a nice cotton-tail rabbit home, dress it out and my mom would cook it up for me to share with my grandmother who was born in the 1870’s and love the taste of wild rabbit, biscuits and gravy. My dad talked gun safety to me when I started shooting and he made a simple statement that I remember to this day, he said, “When you point a gun towards a person you made a decision that the person could die, a life and death decision. When a trigger is pulled the bullet will go on its way where the gun was pointed and it can never be brought back.”
Sorry, I kind of wrote too much here but I do take the gun thing seriously and I think we are responsible for the outcome of the use of all of our guns.
bill- firearms are the second leading method of suicide among juveniles under 18.
Typical breakdown (recent years, ages ~10–17 or under 18)
Suffocation / hanging: Usually the most common method by number of deaths. It accounts for a large share (often the plurality or majority in many recent tabulations) of youth suicides.
Firearms: The second most common method and frequently the leading method among adolescent males. Firearms typically account for roughly 30–45% of youth suicides in recent data, depending on the exact age range and year. Because firearms have a very high case-fatality rate, they contribute disproportionately to deaths even when used less often than other methods.
Poisoning / overdose (drugs, medications, etc.): Third most common. More frequent among females than males, but with a lower fatality rate than firearms or hanging.
Other methods (falls, cutting, etc.): Make up a much smaller share.
Primary sources are CDC WONDER (Underlying Cause of Death) and the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS).
Your argument that if a gun isn’t available they’ll just use another method is valid, but not a reason to not try and limit access to firearms by juveniles, IMO.
Wow. No one is suggesting laws like NZ. With the use of biometric locks, the weapons are still available for home defense.
If they can’t find a gun, they’ll just use a machete is an interesting argument for not restricting access to firearms from juveniles– but have you tried buying a machete in the US?
It is absolutely mind boggling that Brain E takes solace in the idiocy that comes out of Olympia, WA. But it’s about the feelz, and for the greater good, comrade.
Another weird human law!?!?
Maybe these laws are an attempt to go back in time, e.g., did your great great whatever kill a black slave? ..how far back to go?
So we put the father of a killer in jail for fifteen years because he didn’t have the foresight sufficient to know his offspring was going on a killing jag, but we let a mass murderer like Fauci go with a stern scolding and a bit of ridicule. Not to mention the latest case of “Justice for Bryan,” in which the family of a seventeen year old who shot it out with the cops in Elkhart, Indiana and came out on the losing end is somehow seen as the victims deserving of monetary compensation. Because, you know, “He a good boy who dindunuffin”. Welcome to America today.
Certainly the easy path the criminal took is to blame not the will of the criminal.
Look at the extreme circumstances some criminals will go through, nothing will stop them.
The Leftists who push kids never are going to take the blame.
The 2nd Amendment says nothing about ammo, only the right to bear firearms. Ammunition did not exist for the single-shot, ball and powder muskets of the time. The Left is well aware of this soft spot.
A firearm without ammunition isn’t a firearm, it’s a club.
Unless you have a Short Land Pattern Brown Bess with a bayonet,
It is difficult, if not impossible, to kill yourself. What suicides do is put in train a process which will kill them and which they cannot, at the end, struggle out of. Was it Virgina Woolf who put rocks in her pockets before walking into a river? She knew she’d struggle–reflexes–against drowning and might survive or attract the attention of a rescuer. She needed to be beyond that point when the reflexes took over.
You don’t hang yourself by throwing a rope over a beam and pulling on the other end until you die. You set it up what, when you kick over the chair you’re standing on, your reflexes will do no good, since there is no way out.
Shooting yourself in the head is pretty smooth. Little prep, just get the gun and pull the trigger. So, imo, if that were not available, it’s possible that the prep for certain other methods might give time for a few moments’ reflection and… maybe later…… But is the difference–to the extent there might be a difference–justification for some kind of safe storage which some in the household can manage and some not? Never seen a biometric safe. If I had a chisel and a hammer, could I get in? If so, maybe that would be time for second thoughts…..
But still, what is the estimate and what kind of external regulation does it justify, considering that external justification does no good without somebody officially coming in before anything bad happens? Unannounced safe storage checks by police? Unlikely anybody whose weapon is used thus is going to be convinced that the ensuing punishment is a Big Deal, considering the actual tragedy, and it doesn’t come until too late,