My point is that she failed in her responsibility to keep her firearms out of the hands of a son she knew to be psycho.
Do you propose she should have moved her guns off the premesis? Or just not bothered with any security measures at all - becuase hypothetically any security measure can be eventually overcome?
Give it a rest until you know the whole story. There are many ways that he could have gained access from even a dedicated gun owner such as yourself. Whatever mistakes she made, she paid for it with her life.
Explain. I don't see how this is possible without cameras or fingerprinting. Maybe leaving a wheel safe on a certain digit each time would work.
Gun safes are intended for thieves, small children or maybe to stop acts of passion. They are useless for securing something from a calculating adult that lives in the same house.
“Do you propose she should have moved her guns off the premesis? Or just not bothered with any security measures at all - becuase hypothetically any security measure can be eventually overcome?”
I think that would have been a prudent move and perhaps the only one that would have prevented him from gaining access to the weapons at home.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some kind of legislation might be passed (either at federal or state levels) that mandates certain procedures by gun owners when a family member (or other occupant of the household) is having psychological problems or is taking certain types of medications. Not sure of how such “procedures” might go, but might involve reporting of illness and the mandatory securing of weapons, either on-premesis or more likely “off-premesis”.
Since both the Republicans and the N.R.A. seem to be “on the run” at the moment (essentially having little to offer except “compromise”), proposing some kind of “alternative law” with measures as I’ve outlined above would be preferable to a re-instatement of the assault weapons “ban”, or the enactment of legislation considerably more restrictive than that was.