I got an "F" on my report card!

[Grenadier]

It still comes down to a matter of personal choice, regarding how one wishes to implement whatever safety measures he wants to implement, in his own household.

There is no "one size fits all" method that will work for everyone. This is why the attempt to force people to buy trigger locks is a worthless one at best.

People who don't want to install the trigger locks simply will not install them, even if they were forced to buy them. The locks are usually weak, and can serve no other real purpose anyways, which is why it is a waste of money.

Furthermore, there are people who simply have no need to install trigger locks. Folks who live alone, for example, have no reason to put trigger locks on their firearms.

Some people may say "well, what if those guns get stolen?" To that I'll say this: what's going to stop a criminal from using a bolt cutter or a simple hammer and punch to defeat a trigger lock?

In the end, it comes down to the individual firearms owner to use whatever safety methods are appropriate for his particular household. The most important safety will always be the one between the ears, and no number of mechanical failsafes will ever trump this.

 

[Grenadier]

So, why not lock up the ones you aren't using?

What if your first choice of firearm is rendered unusable? Wouldn't it be nice to be able to grab a backup that's readily available?

Why should jurisdictions enforce this? Why not?

Because it's simply unenforceable. Unless you propose having governmental agents barge in on people's homes, and doing spot checks on people who tend not to cause trouble (law abiding firearms owners), you simply end up with an impotent law.

A gun permit, as I've said before, does not equate to a membership in Mensa.

The overwhelming majority of law-abiding firearms owners, and especially those who have concealed carry permits, have a much lower crime rate amongst them, than do those who aren't in the above categories.

We have to tell people to wear seat belts and crash helmets

But not when they aren't using them. Furthermore, any such seat belt or crash helmet laws are most likely invalid when you're operating a vehicle on your own private property. I do know that here in the USA, you are not required to even have a vehicular registration in such cases.

My overall point is that we cannot rely upon people to make sensible choices regardless of what their rights are.

Actually, firearms owners are some of the most responsible people, when it comes to obeying the laws. Furthermore, accidental death by firearm is so low (in the USA, fewer than 900 people total, including, 90 children, died as a result of firearms accidents in the year 2000, according to the National Center for Health Statistics), that the above mentioned law is unnecessary.

Some more interesting notes about the year previous to the one mentioned:

http://www.anesi.com/accdeath.htm


As you can see, the law is more of a solution looking for a (non-existent) problem, not the other way around.