I'm sure there are a hundred-and-one uses for the damned thing as long as it never touches a gun.
Plenty on "our side" have already begun minimizing the impact on blogs and in forums, the apologetics centering around how most manufacturers already include locks with their products anyway.
Ain't that a shame? And why do they do this?
Oh, yeah, to keep from being sued.
How very circular.
The thing is, most gun owners feel this is no big deal, and the general public has been conditioned to respond that gun locks are only common sense. The mandate is acceptable to more people than it's not.
Let's see what else is tacked on in the House. I think the real question here is, do the powers pushing for this want it bad enough, and do they think they can sustain the fallout if they make a few other tiny concessions that are acceptable to more people than they're not?
Things like closing "the so-called gun show loophole" and regulating those icky .50 BMG rifles.
Plenty on "our side" have already begun minimizing the impact on blogs and in forums, the apologetics centering around how most manufacturers already include locks with their products anyway.
Ain't that a shame? And why do they do this?
Oh, yeah, to keep from being sued.
How very circular.
The thing is, most gun owners feel this is no big deal, and the general public has been conditioned to respond that gun locks are only common sense. The mandate is acceptable to more people than it's not.
Let's see what else is tacked on in the House. I think the real question here is, do the powers pushing for this want it bad enough, and do they think they can sustain the fallout if they make a few other tiny concessions that are acceptable to more people than they're not?
Things like closing "the so-called gun show loophole" and regulating those icky .50 BMG rifles.