Insanely dumb trigger lock bill i have to debate on- Help me point out all the holes

[CatsDieNow]

Suggest that your classmates get boots for their cars (or whatever those orange tire locking clamps are called down here, I'm new to this Texas thing).

If everyone was required to have one, then it would help prevent all kinds of nastiness. Major reductions in drunk driving, car theft, drive-by shootings and such. A minor inconvienence like this is necessary for the good of society because car deaths are a much greater risk (see chart above) than firearms. Unforutunatly, when your sick or hurt child needs to get get to the hospital it becomes a major problem. If they use emotional appeals, then hit them right back with one.

Oh, and that little bill your classmates made doesn't appear to actually required the owner to use the trigger lock, just have one. It also doesn't specify when the lock must be in place.

Good luck.

 

[anchored]

Be it enacted by this student congress here assembled that: Section 1: All privately owned firearms, including handguns, hunting rifles, and shotguns must be equipped with trigger locks.

Define "trigger lock", capitalize the term and use it consistently throughout the bill instead of shortening it to "locks."
"all" privately owned firearms necessarilyincludes handguns, hunting rifles and shotguns, so listen them is redundant. Define "firearm" or adopt an already enacted definition. instead.

Section 3: Locks must be standard equipment on guns purchased as of September 1, 2003.

Where's §2? What kind of locks must be standard equipment on guns? What's a "gun?" Did you mean "firearms?" Purchased by whom? Who is responsible - buyer, seller, manufacturer?

Section 4:Individual owners of firearms will be responsible for having locks added to all firearms purchased prior to Sept. 1. 2003 by a gunsmith or other person certified to perform the procedure and issue verification by the Sept. 2003 date.

What kind of locks? What is certification procedure and to whom is verification issued? Are corporate or coolective owners of firearms exempt? Split infinitive - as it reads, only firearms purchased by a gunsmith are affected.

Section 5:Individuals will be required to show proof of trigger locked firearms, either in the form of receipts, verification tags, or actual unloaded weapons in order to purchase hunting licenses, verification tags, gun club memberships, firing range time, or participate in any other legal firearm-based activity.

Illegal restraint of trade - you unless you regulate sale of gun reanges and firing range time by owning them, you can't require compliance. What about bow-hunting licenses? What's the purpose of the verification tag if you can use receipt or actual firearm? Can I produce an unloaded blowgun or peashooter, since "weapon" covers both these items, or must it be a "firearm?" What if a group is buying the membership? What is a "legal firearm-based activity?"

Section 6: After the Sept. 1 date, owning or transporting a privately owned firearm without a trigger lock shall be subject to a fine of $2,000.00

You can't impose a fine without classifying the crime. Why refer to the date in three different ways throughout the bill? Who must pay the fine? Are institutionally-owned firearms exempt?

Finally, why is there no requirement that the firearm locks actually be used? Under this act, installed but unlocked complies, but fails to accomplish the intended effect. Also, this act's restriction to privately-owned firearms implies the locks are unsafe, since police and other groups who depend on them are exempt? Why? would they be less reliable when needed then? This bill, as written, is unconstitutionally vague.