Posted on 06/29/2015 4:55:28 PM PDT by Navy Patriot
Los Angeles city council members are debating controversial new gun law changes aimed at locking up handguns when they're not in use.
According to the Los Angeles Times, the proposal would require city residents to either lock up handguns not being used or apply trigger locks to them. The proposal was authored by Councilman Paul Krekorian and is meant to protect children from gun accidents.
But the plan has faced resistance from the local police officers union – the Los Angeles Police Protective League. The proposed rules exempted active duty and reserve officers, but the union wants retired officers and their families also included. They reportedly wrote a letter to lawmakers arguing that all officers need quick access for self-protection. The letter cited ex-LAPD officer Christopher Dorner's massacre of other officers three years ago.
Union director Pete Repovich reportedly said it was vital for current and retired officers alike to be exempted to “protect themselves...
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Hasn’t the courts already shot this down?
What if the gun is in use protecting yourself and home?
So retired “union buddies” would have supra rights?
Those idiots can’t shoot straight anyway and shouldn’t have a gun on duty, much less any other time...
No exemptions for anybody.
That includes the politicians and hollyweird glitterati and their body guards.
That's the problem. Property Redistribution Technicians (burglars) would really prefer that your gun be locked up when they run into you in your home.
Infringes the “keeping” part of the 2A.
That and dirtbag, over reacting, wanna be army men Cops, don’t want any flack either. As they raid the wrong house in the middle of the night with absolutely no consequences.
“...officers need quick access for self-protection...”
-
Some animals are more equal than others.
On June 8, this year, SCOTUS denied cert. to hear ESPANOLA JACKSON, ET AL. v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, ET AL.
Thomas penned a dissent to the denial of cert, I suppose as an effort to persuade the 9th Circuit to change course.
Gun owners need to be responsible at all times. Isn’t that taught in gun safety courses? Once again the liberal busybodies want to control things from their ivory tower.
Legislating responsible behavior is never a good thing.
So if you lock the doors and windows on your house are the guns considered locked up?
Only the Ruling Elite may have a firearm "in use protecting their home", serfs need not apply.
The LAPD will use their firearms and stellar professionalism to "protect" you serfs in incidents like fellow officer Dorner's spat with his buddies.
You act like laws have meanings these days.
And we the people don't?
More and more I despise cops.
Attack the tool instead of the tool abuser.
Lock up guns instead of the criminals.
Didn’t Washington DC just get slapped down by the courts for the same approach?
Affirmative, I suggest everyone train up on what to say to the jackboots, ... nothing without your lawyer, then the lawyer says that the firearm was properly secured and locked before being unlocked and retrieved by the home defender at the appearance of threat, and never left the control of the home defender afterward.
Of course, IF you are a member of the Ruling Elite, .... the Rule of Mob SCOTUS has said so.
See #18, FReegards,...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.