03-24-2016, 12:37 PM
(03-24-2016, 12:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is taking me a while to find an exact copy of the proposed bill, but the legislative history show it was amended to remove a provision that made a "temporary leaving" of a loaded firearm an offense. So it looks like they were bending over backwards to make sure it was more about "gun storage" than just randomly leaving a gun unattended for a moment.
And I can agree with that. I thought I was a very attentive parent, but I honestly can not say that my kids never got a hold of something that could have been dangerous. Horrible tragedies happen sometimes that are just accidents.
Also debate about making the penalty greater if the gun was discharged by the child.
I appreciate the effort but I don't think that answers all of the questions. I keep a firearm readily accessible in my home. There is a loaded magazine in it but I don't chamber a round. Would that prevent liability? As I read it, no. How about keeping a loaded magazine in a separate location from the firearm? I don't have kids so this isn't an issue for me but I will say that many firearms related legislation is written by people with minimal to zero knowledge of firearms. Here in CA, especially, some of the proposed gun laws are beyond idiotic. Governor Brown, not know as a particularly right leaning governor had to veto an especially moronic one. Gavin Newsome, the biggest POS on two feet, is attempting to get a proposition on the ballot that would effectively ban the sale of ammunition and make rifles with detachable magazine illegal. There's a lot of overreach on the anti 2nd amendment side so incidents like the one in OP need to always be taken with a grain of salt IMO.
