Carol Manstrom and Paul Kemp have gathered enough signatures to get the strictest gun-storage law measure on the 2020 Oregon ballot.
Mrs. Manstrom's motivation for supporting this measure is the tragic suicide of her son by an unsecured firearm. Her belief is had the firearm been secured, her son would be alive today which, of course, is the wishful thinking of a grieving parent. She can't substantiate her belief, and legislation to secure firearms by trigger locks and safes shouldn't be based on wishful thinking.
I submit that if the firearm wasn't available, there were other means available for this young man to commit suicide such as kitchen utensils, household cleaners, razor blades, and common medicine cabinet drugs, to name a few. Should all of these household items be secured under lock and key?
I submit a scenario where trigger locks and safes could be life-threatening. A homeowner is the victim of a home invasion. While trying to find the key to his trigger lock then unlocking his firearm while being brutalized by the home invader, the homeowner succumbs to this attack. You see the homeowner, under this high-stress scenario, lacks the fine motor skills necessary to insert the key into the lock to remove the lock. And the home invader is going to make sure the homeowner can't remove the lock.
You have free articles remaining.
I ask, should all law-abiding Oregon firearm owners be required to secure their firearms in their homes premised on wishful thinking? I'll let you decide.
Albany (Oct. 5)