2/00 Trigger Locks

Trigger Locks
Larry Pratt

Those who want civilian disarmament — the true objective of gun control — tell us how dangerous it is to keep a gun in our house.

We are told that locking up our safety is necessary to protect the children. Well, let’s put this emotional argument into perspective. Of the 1400 accidental firearms deaths in 1995, 200 were children under 15.

When you hear figures higher than 200, remember that the gang-banger age group is included — sometimes up to 22 or even 24 years old being considered a “child”.

Also consider that 2900 kids that same year were killed in motor vehicle crashes, 950 drowned and more than 1000 children died from fire and burns. Hundreds more children die in bicycle accidents every year than die from all types of firearms.

Well, the anti-self-defense crowd argues, cars and water have social benefits whereas guns are only made to kill.

Really? What about the 2.5 million people who use a gun each year in self-defense? That is not a social utility?

The Wall Street Journal reported last year that Beretta tested a “Saf T Lok” which caused 18 of 27 rounds to “totally malfunction.”

And when Handgun Control’s chief attorney, Dennis Hennigan, attempted to demonstrate the same trigger lock at an HCI-sponsored event, he found to his embarrassment, that he was unable to disengage the lock.

Now, we might want to laugh at the egg on Mr. Hennigan’s face, but it would have been no laughing matter if the trigger lock kept a homeowner from using his gun against an assailant.

Locking up our guns is a way to help criminals kill their victims. It is an insanity borrowed from Britain where cumbersome and eventually expensive storage requirements led many to give up their guns.

After all, most of us urban dwellers have little opportunity to hunt. And if a gun cannot be used for self-defense, why own one reasoned many Brits as they got rid of their guns long before the remainder were confiscated.