At least we are clear which side you are on. I qualified quite a few of those statements, which you conventiently left out.
A locked front door on my house, hell... just OWNING a house and the private property Rights that go with it, should be enough to make me immune from the actions of some theif. But you apparently APPROVE of a gun lock requirement which actually increases my liability. Thanks, but no thanks.
Again, totally misrepresenting my posts on the subject, which comes as no surprise as you've got nothing else to argue with.
At least we are clear which side you are on.
I'm a gun owner. That's the side I'm on, regardless of your misrepresentations to the contrary. Do a little digging, and you'll see I was active in trying to get CCW passed here in Wisconsin.
I qualified quite a few of those statements, which you conventiently left out.
Each of your posts, I posted in their entirety. But I did not post every one of your posts. I only posted those to clearly show how wrong you were. And you were wrong about most of that amendment from the git-go.
But you apparently APPROVE of a gun lock requirement which actually increases my liability.
That amendment does no such thing. It doesn't create any liabilities for gun owners that didn't exist before. The only liabilities added are for gun dealers, and NIB guns come with locks anyway. It does, however, provide immunity from liability if your handguns are locked up. But again, your complete lack of comprehension comes as no surprise to me.
I advise you to sit down, STFU, and READ the amendment before making an even bigger arse of yourself.