Is it because alcohol, tobacco, and firearms also have legal pathways? So they spend time tracking down cheats and checking/enforcing regulations?

  • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    You’ve glossed over how someone would get caught. Storage is done in private residences, so in order to catch someone you’d need to search their homes.

    Regular searches would be unreasonable. As well as any searches just because they own a gun. The only time someone would be charged for this is when another search of the home would be conducted. The law wouldnt protect anyone nor would it increase safety or lower the rates of crimes, but add more charges to someone already being arrested. It would only inflate prison times.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      No, you just make people have a requirement to carry gun insurance. See if the insurance company wants to write you a policy unless it’s sure you’re storing the gun properly. Maybe you need to provide a receipt for a storage locker before they will write the policy.

      Maybe you do have to have someone inspect it. Plenty of states have motor vehicle inspections.

      Let the free market solve this problem. Right now. Gun owners want all the toys they can dream of but want zero responsibility for when someone inevitably uses their gun to murder someone.

    • phillaholic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      You can’t keep a Tiger in your living room. In order to catch someone with it, police aren’t going door to door doing Tiger checks. That’s how literally every law works.