If you can't afford a safe, you can't afford a gun.

[CessnaDriver]

I suspect 99 percent of burglers are in and out in minutes, grab and dash all the little valuable things that are easily carried.

If you've done your part to prevent your firearms from being easily taken that way that's enough in my mind.

If they are there specifically for your guns, then they probably have a plan for that, safe or no safe.

[Citadelgrad87]

Originally Posted by Merc1138

How am I rejecting personal liability? Making your own decisions about what do you with your own property is about as accepting as you can get of personal liability.

What I'm rejecting is the idea that I would somehow be liable for the actions of what someone else has done after they've already stolen from me in the first place. That's not personal liability. That would be accepting liability for the actions of criminals.

"Personal liability" on the part of a victim, meaning the idea that there should be personal liability on the part of someone whose property has been stolen for a criminal misuse of that property.

Shorthand way of saying you don't like the concept, not saying that you don't accept personal responsibility.

[Merc1138]

Originally Posted by Citadelgrad87

"Personal liability" on the part of a victim, meaning the idea that there should be personal liability on the part of someone whose property has been stolen for a criminal misuse of that property.

Shorthand way of saying you don't like the concept, not saying that you don't accept personal responsibility.

There shouldn't be any liability on the part of the victim, they're the victim. If someone stole my blender, I should have the same liability if they used it to beat someone to death, or make smoothies. ie. None. Accepting liability for the actions of a dirtbag only serves to remove responsibility of those actions from the dirtbag.

"Well if you had done X, then the criminal couldn't have stolen it and done Y" well maybe the criminal shouldn't have stolen it in the first place? Again, we're talking about a thief, not someone's toddler finding a gun in the sock drawer(and we already discussed the idiot parents who let the 3rd grader think it was ok to take a gun to school).

[Citadelgrad87]

Originally Posted by Merc1138

There shouldn't be any liability on the part of the victim, they're the victim. If someone stole my blender, I should have the same liability if they used it to beat someone to death, or make smoothies. ie. None. Accepting liability for the actions of a dirtbag only serves to remove responsibility of those actions from the dirtbag.

"Well if you had done X, then the criminal couldn't have stolen it and done Y" well maybe the criminal shouldn't have stolen it in the first place? Again, we're talking about a thief, not someone's toddler finding a gun in the sock drawer(and we already discussed the idiot parents who let the 3rd grader think it was ok to take a gun to school).

Preaching to the choir. I said I agree with you, then you misunderstood what I said, so I clarified.

I am drawing a distinction between imposing liability for the misuse of stolen property as a motivator, and simply wanting to keep your stuff safe from criminals as a motivator to secure firearms.

Either motivator counsels that we should make it as difficult for the scumbags as possible.

[winnre]

I guess the only solution is a gun that can only be fired by its owner.

I have one of those fingerprint scanners on my PC to boot up, ask me how well that works.

[Bobby Ricigliano]

I wonder how many people have a 3K fully loaded AR and a bunch of high end handguns in their closet and don't bother with the expense of a safe. I will bet there are a lot. That kind of stupidity does not help the cause.

[NOTABIKER]

Originally Posted by anthem

My guns are an extension of myself. As much as my jeep, my motorcycle and other things are. I work on my jeep, and my motorcycle, and keep them stored appropriately.

I keep my guns stored appropriately as well. That means oiled, loaded, and in my case, in a safe in my bedroom.

That is what works for me.

is that bike a Harley ? reason i asked i never met a HD owner that could change his own OIL>

[zombiekiller1]

Lol some entertaining stuff in here....

[vonderplatz]

Here's a recent post:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ighlight=stole

[Born To Glock]

Originally Posted by vonderplatz

Here's a recent post:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ighlight=stole

Yeah, and the lesson there is that having a safe is not enough. You actually need to bolt it to the ground (i.e., "properly installed").

[vonderplatz]

This is what I got from various threads on Calguns:

Have a safe, but not a cheap one:
Bolt it to the ground:
Have a monitored burglar alarm:
Have Video Surveillance:
Maybe have a built-in so nobody will know you have a safe:
Don't ever mention guns to anyone (that will make you a target):

There is always another layer of security when the second guessers stop by.

[L84CABO]

Originally Posted by Rod Nokin

That's my new mantra. If you lock up your guns, no one will steal them. If no one steals them they won't be used in crimes. Less crimes with guns means less bad press. Less bad press means we get left alone. When I am at home, my firearms are accessible. When we go to work in the morning or go away for the weekend they are locked in the safe. I wouldn't mind seeing an ad campaign by the NRA, the manufacturers and maybe even the government stressing the importance of gun safes. They do get expensive but I think in this day and age they are a necessity and would solve a lot of problems.

So when you say a "safe," you mean a REAL safe...right? Not a RSC that the vast majority of people have and that they call "safes."

[guitar-nut]

My main defense weapon is kept within arms reach with a round in the chamber and the safety off.

[retiredAFcop]

Originally Posted by Rod Nokin

That's my new mantra. If you lock up your guns, no one will steal them. If no one steals them they won't be used in crimes. Less crimes with guns means less bad press. Less bad press means we get left alone.

Way to blame the victim.

Do you also subscribe to the "one daughter, one chastity belt" mantra as a means of preventing rape?

[retiredAFcop]

Originally Posted by Born To Glock

Yeah, and the lesson there is that having a safe is not enough. You actually need to bolt it to the ground (i.e., "properly installed").

Which renters generally aren't able to do. Such a demand would make renters ineligible to own firearms.

[otteray]

"If you can't afford a safe, you can't afford a gun."
Sure sounds like a catchy Brady bumper sticker slogan to me.

[tap4154]

Many years ago I bought a Homak cabinet ($89 @ Turners) and added a garage door bolt to it with carriage bolts, then secured it to the sidewall of my bedroom closet by using lag bolts into studs from the inside. It would be pretty difficult to break into, requiring defeating the stock cylinder locks, plus the large Masterlock on the bolt. Has 5 rifles and 6 handguns in it, with room for a couple more.

[SilverTauron]

Originally Posted by tap4154

Many years ago I bought a Homak cabinet ($89 @ Turners) and added a garage door bolt to it with carriage bolts, then secured it to the sidewall of my bedroom closet by using lag bolts into studs from the inside. It would be pretty difficult to break into, requiring defeating the stock cylinder locks, plus the large Masterlock on the bolt. Has 5 rifles and 6 handguns in it, with room for a couple more.

Two big guys, a crowbar, and 10 minutes would be all you'd need to bust that open.

If a truly secure safe is a moral & legal prerequisite for gun ownership, all of us would have to disarm. This fact is not lost on the opposition, if it is among the people of the gun.

[tap4154]

Originally Posted by SilverTauron

Two big guys, a crowbar, and 10 minutes would be all you'd need to bust that open.

If a truly secure safe is a moral & legal prerequisite for gun ownership, all of us would have to disarm. This fact is not lost on the opposition, if it is among the people of the gun.

I'm not saying I support a law that folks must have a safe before owning a gun, and I realize that mine could be defeated. I'm just showing an inexpensive way that even renters could use to at least provide a good measure of security for their guns.

Most of the break-ins I hear about around here are quick grab and go's of whatever is easily available. Many that I've heard of recently don't bring anything with them. They knock on the front door, and if no one answers they go around back and enter through an open window, or break one with a rock from the yard, then use pillow cases from the home's beds to toss jewelery, cash, iPads and anything else they can grab quick and get out.

In fact my sister got hit exactly like this a few months ago, in a city inland of me, and there's been a few very similar just a few blocks away from me where the owners left doors unlocked. As they slept, the perps walked in and grabbed the easy stuff laying around, and ran!

[JDay]

Originally Posted by SilverTauron

Two big guys, a crowbar, and 10 minutes would be all you'd need to bust that open.

If a truly secure safe is a moral & legal prerequisite for gun ownership, all of us would have to disarm. This fact is not lost on the opposition, if it is among the people of the gun.

30 seconds and a sledgehammer would suffice.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

[Kinsel83]

What about those $100 stack on safes? One or two people can pick those up and take it away. There goes the OP 's reason for a gun safe.

Don't leave a safe in sight. Lock it up in some walk in closet or something. Everyone can do what they like. I am responsible for MY firearms alone.

[tap4154]

Originally Posted by JDay

30 seconds and a sledgehammer would suffice.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

Come on over and try it.

If you can open it with a sledge hammer in 30 seconds, all the guns are yours, and I'll toss in two ammo cans full of various rounds.

BTW, how many common thieves carry sledge hammers on them?

[zhyla]

I have a stackon cabinet. It was my uncles and while it was his some punks popped it open with I assume a prybar. I bent it back into shape and replaced the lock (which popped out). That Homak setup wouldn't last 5 minutes. 4 minutes is spent rummaging around your garage looking for a prybar or a big screwdriver.

Safes are nice if you have the cash and space for them. It's pretty arrogant to assume everyone else does.

[John Browning]

Originally Posted by tap4154

Come on over and try it.

If you can open it with a sledge hammer in 30 seconds, all the guns are yours, and I'll toss in two ammo cans full of various rounds.

BTW, how many common thieves carry sledge hammers on them?

Anybody can easily open that with a sledge or prybar and 30 seconds. Those gun cabinets are a joke. Here is a real safe that is much more robust and meets its end in short order.



Please PM me your address so I can come get my guns and ammo. I will supply my own tools for your convenience.

[retiredAFcop]

Video is sales propaganda.

Having low cost safes provides consumers with options.

Locks exist to keep honest people honest. At best, they delay thieves, and may even deter them. But they don't protect from a determined and prepared thief.

My security standard was once locking cases and/or trigger/action locks.

Then I started storing my guns in a closet with a locking door. The locked closet provided a great way to keep anyone from accidentally accessing any of my firearms - which is my greatest concern (I have a much younger sister, and also a young nephew).

The next step was a locking cabinet (which I now use to store reloading supplies) made of think sheet metal.

Then an upgrade to safes of the type you find at hardware and sporting goods stores, with an empty weight of under 200lbs.

That's as far as I can really go until I own a home.

[retiredAFcop]

The whole "You must have a safe to buy a gun" concept is just another ploy to restrict firearms ownership to the wealthy - since it would exclude most renters, and would dramatically increase the cost of buying your first gun.
It is just like that "liability insurance" concept - a means to prevent the poor and working class from owning firearms.

[tcrpe]

I can't afford NOT to have gun safes.

What's the big deal?

[Doheny]

I can't afford to pay attention.

[SilverTauron]

Originally Posted by retiredAFcop

Video is sales propaganda.

Having low cost safes provides consumers with options.

Locks exist to keep honest people honest. At best, they delay thieves, and may even deter them. But they don't protect from a determined and prepared thief.

My security standard was once locking cases and/or trigger/action locks.

Then I started storing my guns in a closet with a locking door. The locked closet provided a great way to keep anyone from accidentally accessing any of my firearms - which is my greatest concern (I have a much younger sister, and also a young nephew).

The next step was a locking cabinet (which I now use to store reloading supplies) made of think sheet metal.

Then an upgrade to safes of the type you find at hardware and sporting goods stores, with an empty weight of under 200lbs.

That's as far as I can really go until I own a home.

The "safes" at your local hardware store are the home equivalent of The Club: the buyer feels safe even though crooks all but die laughing at the thought of being stopped by one.

A real safe is something akin to a bank vault built into the structure. Everything else can be carted away or pried open.

[tcrpe]

A lot of contorted logic on the road to "gun safes are ineffective".

It reminds me of the arguments so long ago that not wearing a seatbelt was actually safer than wearing one.

Or that wearing a motorcycle helmet was more dangerous than not wearing a helmet.

Or that vaccines were an evil plot.

"Um, yea, it's more responsible for me to leave my guns loaded on a park bench than to lock them up in a gun safe."

[FSRD]

Originally Posted by 17+1

I know people with safes that are worth a few thousand more than my car. He said it was custom made, has double doors, is fire resistant, etc. I think the company is in Visalia California...I didn't bother to look too hard at it because it's way out of my price range. I have a cheap safe. I figure it's better than nothing.

Met and spoke to a guy that sells safes awhile back from Visalia. He stated "safes are the best way the Government can collect your guns quickly as they are already boxed up and ready to go". I'm not saying I agree with him, it just struck me as a odd statement coming from a guy that makes his living off of safe sales.

[SilverTauron]

Originally Posted by tcrpe

"Um, yea, it's more responsible for me to leave my guns loaded on a park bench than to lock them up in a gun safe."

Considering the facts of how easily safes can be defeated, a park bench offers the same amount of protection.

What is "responsible" is a social consideration. What's "Secure" is a factual determination. Factually speaking, most safes only secure the owners self-esteem.

If that's "tortured logic" , note that on this website, a merest fraction of gun owners in this country, there are two threads I can link to which show people's safes being compromised. I can only imagine how many of the 90+ million gun owners nationwide come home to find their "responsible" storage solutions missing.

[tcrpe]

Originally Posted by SilverTauron

If that's "tortured logic" , note that on this website, a merest fraction of gun owners in this country, there are two threads I can link to which show people's safes being compromised.

Just checked both of mine. Neither has been compromised. Of course, they exist under several layers of responsible security.

It is a gun owner's responsibility to secure his firearms.

[Brass Balls]

Originally Posted by Kinsel83

What about those $100 stack on safes? One or two people can pick those up and take it away. There goes the OP 's reason for a gun safe.

Don't leave a safe in sight. Lock it up in some walk in closet or something. Everyone can do what they like. I am responsible for MY firearms alone.

A buddy brought the safe in before the door on his closet was framed in, now it is in the closet and it is too big to be removed without knocking out a wall. He figures to just sell the safe with the house if he ever moves.

[tcrpe]

Originally Posted by Brass Balls

A buddy brought the safe in before the door on his closet was framed in, now it is in the closet and it is too big to be removed without knocking out a wall. He figures to just sell the safe with the house if he ever moves.

Yea, well, he could just leave his guns on a park bench, that's just as secure.

[tap4154]

Originally Posted by scobun

Anybody can easily open that with a sledge or prybar and 30 seconds. Those gun cabinets are a joke. Here is a real safe that is much more robust and meets its end in short order.



Please PM me your address so I can come get my guns and ammo. I will supply my own tools for your convenience.

PM me your SS number so I can run a background check before allowing you on my premises, then you can come try your 30 second break-in, if you also first provide cash to repair the damage done after 30 seconds when you are left huffing and puffing, and my cabinet is bent and damaged, but not opened.

I live in an apartment, perhaps you missed that, and have no sledge hammers or other major tools available for a common thief to use. These old Homak cabinets are better built than the Stack Ons, and this has huge fender washers on the 4 - 2 1/2" long 5/16" lag bolts into the back studs. No one could remove it without destroying a lot of wall/framing, and making a huge ruckus that would alert my apartment neighbors, and there's no good points of leverage in the way it's positioned in my closet. The added garage door lock, with 1/2" carriage bolts with fender washers on the inside also adds quite a bit of time and effort to defeat. I agree, with just the two stock locks, and few good hits on each with a sledge hammer may pop it open, and locks can be drilled out, but then the common thief has to be carrying a sledge hammer and good cordless drill. Just not what usually happens, in reality, around here.

Bottom line is my realistic assessment of the threat here in my town, where virtually all break-ins are by unarmed druggie losers just looking for easy-to-grab items, jewelery, and cash, and guns that are laying out, and they don't carry tools.

What I have done by installing this inexpensive cab with the extra lock is insure to a very good degree that such a break-in won't result in my guns being on the street, and used in crimes.

So you can insult it, and me, all you want to, but I've done my part to be responsible, and IMO there's a 99.99% probability that none of my guns will be stolen from that cabinet.

[m98]

100% disagree with the op....so much gun control like preaching

[retiredAFcop]

Originally Posted by SilverTauron

The "safes" at your local hardware store are the home equivalent of The Club: the buyer feels safe even though crooks all but die laughing at the thought of being stopped by one.

A real safe is something akin to a bank vault built into the structure. Everything else can be carted away or pried open.

A serious and prepared crook can get into a bank vault. It's just a matter of spending the time and effort.

The real reasons to have a safe, for me, are these:

1) Keeps my young nephew or other guests in my house from accidentally handling my firearms (liability and basic safety). The locked closet, storage cabinet, trigger locks, or locked cases also accomplished this.

2) Dissuades the casual burglar who doesn't have the time or tools to break into the safe. The locked closet, storage cabinet, trigger locks, or locked cases also accomplished this - but to a lesser degree. No mistake, if someone is coming to my house intent on stealing my guns and prepared to deal with my safe, and I'm not home, I can't stop them.

3) Allows me to honestly fill out the safe affidavit rather than having to continually buy (and then return) trigger locks whenever I purchase a firearm.

4) Provides evidence that any burglary that results in theft of one or more of my firearms forced the burglar to breach at least two levels of security (in case there is any doubt/argument as to whether or not my house was "secured"), and thus protects me from being held criminally liable for what a thief does with any of my firearms that re stolen. The locked closet, storage cabinet, trigger locks, or locked cases also accomplished this, but the safe is less likely to be removed and opened at the thieves' convenience.

5) Helps to convince my landlord that I am a responsible gun owner, so I am allowed to keep my firearms in my rental home without violating my lease conditions.

6) Provides an extra barrier against warrantless searches of my firearms collection. The locked closet, storage cabinet, trigger locks, or locked cases also accomplished this, to varying degrees.

Also - Provides some minimal amount of fire protection. But I'm not really banking on that.

So, like most gun owners, my larger concerns are with legality issues and keeping honest people honest, rather than actual "bank vault" levels of security.

[GUNFREAK]

Getting a safe is one of the best investments I made. I got the biggest (Liberty FatBoy Jr.)and heaviest (+700 lbs.) I could afford and fit in my house. The company also drilled into my foundation and screwed in a couple of concrete anchors. It by no means is fail proof (nothing is) but it is the best defense I could get (short of building an underground bunker). This may not be affordable to everyone or they may rent their residence but having a safe is something every gun owner should consider. Most sceptics on this threads alternative is to hide their guns somewhere in their home. That may work if you have one or a couple pistols but I could never rest easy knowing that if my guns stolen they could be used to hurt innocent people. Having the safe does bring peace of mind but it also is a big deterrent having my guns stolen.

I don't think the people on this forum can break into a safe as easy as they say. With the proper tools and time they may but it would slow down the would-be thieves enough to move on to something easier. Like Tap4154 said, I've done my part to be as responsible as possible with my firearms.

[retiredAFcop]

Again, the OP's argument is simply another tactic to restrict gun ownership to the wealthy elites.

Let's boil it down to the "logical" conclusion of this line of thinking: "If you don't own a house with an expensive security system, private armed guards, and a bank vault level safe, you really don't have the right to be armed"

In short: "Only the wealthy deserve to have guns, and all of us peasants can rely on clubs or pitchforks to defend ourselves". A concept I wholeheartedly reject - as should any American.

A trigger lock or locked case is probably fine when you own just one gun. As your collection grows, you want to develop storage systems that move towards being more secure - but you have to balance real world considerations with the ideal, and there will always be compromise. Even military arms vaults are not impregnable.