Apparently, as they dig through rubble and come across guns, they are tagging them and marking the location where they are found and taking them for storage. For the safety of everyone involved, I don’t think it’s unreasonable. Of course, that’s only based on how it’s being conducted and how easily they return them.
If you don’t have the gun on you, I don’t know why they wouldn’t be in a safe or locked hard case. If I’m abandoning my abode due to an oncoming tornado, I’m grabbing my SHTF gear (including and especially firearms) and hauling ass. Everything else is locked down and in. sure, whatever is inside the safe is probably damaged, but like a loose firearm is going to fare any better.
Now we’ll see how easily the owners get their firearms back. Make, model and serial number should do the trick. And let’s hope the state isn’t keeping a list of who picks up what.
Via Say Uncle
My brother was a victim of the infamous May 3, 1999, super duper tornado in the Oklahoma City area. Winds of 318 mph were measured only 3/4 mile from his house, clocked by doppler radar.
Another house near his was erased, leaving only the concrete slab floor that was scoured clean except for the big Browning gun safe that was bolted to it. The paint was sandblasted off it, but it was otherwise intact, had not budged, and the lock worked.
I think I’m as ready as I’ll ever be.
Have you been in a tornado before? I just ask because I have yet to meet a person who actually has been in one that has time to organize and “haul ass” out of one’s abode. In fact, going outside and getting in your car is the worst thing you can do. Maybe I read it wrong, but how I interpret what you wrote simply doesn’t make sense for reacting to a tornado.
I think the problem is that safes (at least those not secured into the foundation or some of the lighter weight versions) and hard cases become flying objects in a case like this. You might have everything “secure” in some sort of storage device, but chances are that the storage device will not be where you last left it if your home takes a direct hit from a tornado. Once it goes flying and lands somewhere, there is a good chance the case or cabinet would break or come unlocked.
Bitter beat me to it.
I was raised in tornado country (Indiana…not as bad as Oklahoma or Kansas, but we got our fair share). Tornadoes move fast and you get little warning. There is no time to “bug out” and trying places you in more danger than hunkering down and waiting it out.
Tornadoes pick up entire cars, homes, barns etc etc etc and can move them a mile. A gun safe, even if firmly attached to the ground, is no guarantee that your guns won’t be scattered hither and yon. Besides, an 800 pound safe flying through the air at 300mph can make one hell of a mess when it hits something.
Even so. some people have guns but don’t have gun safes. If my only firearms are my 20 year old hunting rifle and a double barrel shotgun with a cracked stock that belonged to granpap, total value $200, what is the motivation to spend $500 to $1000 for a gun safe to protect them? Especially if I live in a rural area or small town with little to no crime.
If the Finger of God comes down on top of your locale, then no, you wouldn’t have time to drive in the opposite direction of the oncoming tornado. I live in earthquake-urbia, not in tornado alley, but I know the strength of tornados and what they are capable of.
So let’s change the scenario: Grab your rifle and head to your basement/tornado shelter/concrete doghouse/whatever you got; everything else is locked down in a safe. It doesn’t matter if you only have one gun, two guns, whatever. There is no reason to leave valuable (and possibly dangerous) things sitting around in closets. If nothing else, put into a large, sturdy, lockable case to prevent easy removal by miscreants.
Yes, a safe or large gun case becomes a large, heavy flying oblect when under the influence of a tornado. Big whup. If a tornado can impale a stick through a telephone pole, think of what it can do with a 6-8lb, long object with a pointy end. It isn’t going to matter if you get run through with the barrel of a Remington 700 or squshed under a safe; it’s lights out either way. Better to just be safe.
+ a bunch. Get low, get covered, don’t run. Far too many variables if you book it, idiots on the road, flying debris, heavy rain and low visibility, plus you have to stay on the road and the twister doesn’t.
My point on safes and gun cabinets was that they could easily break if your house takes a hit. Is it really fair to assume that people are just leaving their guns out in the open if they did have them locked in a secure cabinet, but those pesky 300+ mph winds just happened to bust the lock and their guns get dropped throughout the city?
I just see way too much assumption in this post that’s not accurate in the context of a tornado. Those clouds do very unique damage compared to many other natural disasters. As much as you say you would plan this way, the winds the strip bark of off trees often have a way of getting in your way.
Sorry Bitter, but I think you’re the one doing the majority of the assuming here.
In the post right below this one, Jeff Soyer of Alphecca admits to putting his guns in just soft cases and then into the closet. His commetors admit to just putting them “under the bedâ€, etc.
I have multiple friends in the local constabulary who, when they go to a residence to take a theft report, hear gun owners tell them that the firearms they kept in the dresser or the night stand or the cupboard or between the mattresses, or in any number of unsecured locations, was stolen.
In contrast, when they go to the home of a firearms owner with a “secure storage device†(aka: a safe), they get told that no firearms were stolen, because they were in the safe.
Unfortunately, there are many more instances with unsecured firearms than with ones that are secured. In my house, when I am home, there is one unsecured rifle and one unsecured pistol. Everything else is in a safe.
While I in no way wish for safe storage of firearms to be legislated, gun owners shoot themselves in the foot (pardon the pun) when they leave their guns leaning/laying about unsecured. I had to go to my state capital this year to fight off both a bill that would ban gun shows and another that would have made safe storage a law.
Most gun owners don’t seem to take the storage of their firearms seriously enough and that is why I know that I am correct in believing that most of the guns that will be recovered in Kansas were not properly secured.
As for inaccurate assumptions about the damage a tornado can do, if you are at the sink and washing dishes and one touches down in your front yard or on top of your house, no, there is no time. But it is my understanding that tornados are rather noisy and you do get a certain amount of time, whether it be 30 seconds or two minutes, to get underground or at least into the bathtub. In the latter, more realistic scenario, grabbing your firearms and getting to relative safety is easily doable.
Here in earthquake-urbia, you get no warning whatsoever and if you can keep your head about you, you can make a b-line to safety while grabbing what you need to grab. I have been lucky in that I have been able to do that in all three on the moderate-to-large shakers that have hit in my lifetime (one of which I was traveling on the interstate and had the road surface shift 3ft to the right without taking my car with it).
Sorry to assume the worst about the improper storage of firearms amongst Kansasan gun owners, but things being what they are, I have no doubts that I am correct, for the exact reason listed by SailorCurt (that “They’re only worth a couple hundred dollars, so why buy a safe for that” excuse).
If you consider “safe storage” to be such an essential part of gun ownership, why NOT make it a law? If we gun owners who do not invest in a safe are being irresponsible as you imply, isn’t it appropriate to incur some consequences for our irresponsible behavior?
I grew up in an area where no one even locked their doors. I don’t think my parents even HAD keys for the house.
Everything must be evaluated in terms of cost/benefit. If you live in a high crime area or maybe don’t but have enough invested in your gun collection to warrant it, perhaps the benefits of using a gun safe offset the cost of purchasing and properly installing it.
That doesn’t make your cost/benefit equation applicable to every situation.
Basically, what you are saying, is that some little old lady widow on social security living in a high crime area who can barely afford the $50 she paid for that old single shot .410 shotgun she uses for self-protection is irresponsible unless she pays the couple of hundred dollars for the cheapest gun safe she can find?
Sorry, but you’re not convincing me of that.
Since you’re not advocating a law, I can’t accuse you of trying to “force” everyone to do it your way…and I guess you have every right to be self-righteous, judgmental and condescending…but that doesn’t mean that I have to agree with you.
Sorry that you feel that way, Curt, but an $89 steel box from K-Mart or GI Joes would suffice to discourage perdators and thieves. Hell, a $45 dollar aluminum case with the handles cut off would probably do the trick, sick criminals are usually criminals because they are both dumb and lazy.
I don’t want a law because, just like you cannot use the government to enforce morality, you cannot use them to enforce conscience. If you don’t mind the possibility that a piece of your property can be taken and used against an innocent victim of a robbery (or yourself, since you quite probably don’t lock your ammo away either), then that is your decision.
And that is why I carry on a daily basis: because criminals use stolen firearms to commit their crimes in over 85% of crimes committed.
Having seen what finding out what your stolen firearm was used for can do to a man, and having watched the civil suit progress against this friend of the family, I see things differently than you. And that is what makes America great.
You can keep your name calling to yourself though. I am none of those things. I, just like you, have only my opinions, and we all know what those are worth.
Just a bit more than those $2 words you used.
I apologize if you took that as name calling, I was attempting to describe your apparent attitude toward this particular issue. I didn’t intend it as a personal insult, and I am sincerely sorry that it sounded that way. As many fancy words as I know, sometimes I’m not incredibly good at getting my point across. I don’t know you, I have no basis for forming an opinion about you generally, but on this particular subject, you come across as having those traits that I used as descriptives. For the record, I read your blog regularly and have great respect for most of your positions and opinions. On this particular subject, however, we disagree.
I have to admit that I did get a little defensive there and I still feel a little defensive about it. You are doing the same thing that so many gun banners do…you had a personal experience that led you to a conclusion and are now convinced that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong and that your position is unassailable because of an anecdote you can relate. How is that different than, say, Sarah Brady who wants to completely eliminate gun ownership based upon what happened to her husband? The only difference is in degree.
$89 steel box from K-Mart or GI Joes would suffice to discourage perdators and thieves. Hell, a $45 dollar aluminum case with the handles cut off would probably do the trick, sick criminals are usually criminals because they are both dumb and lazy.
Don’t get me wrong, I would never condemn anyone for using security measures that are less than ideal (which is what I do)…it’s better than nothing…but if the crook is too lazy or stupid to figure out how to operate the prybar (or just a screwdriver in most cases) that would be necessary to break open such an enclosure…how did they get into your house in the first place?
Basically, it seems to me that you are saying that, in effect, owning a firearm is not a right, but is rather a privilege contingent upon one’s ability to afford (at the minimum) an $89 box or $45 case in addition to the cost of the firearm and ammunition.
My copy of the Constitution doesn’t include that clause.
Everyone must make their own decisions based upon their circumstances. Let’s make a deal: I won’t call you “self-righteous, judgmental and condescending” if you won’t imply that I’m irresponsible for not living up to your “safe storage” standards as a gun owner.
Heya Curt, my apologies if I came off sounding as though I am holding myself above others, which apparently I did. I don’t know many fancy words, and those I do know I rarely use, which leads to being misunderstood more often than I should allow. Just know that I wish no ill will upon my fellow gun owners, no matter their “storage statusâ€. I only hope that if they can, they do.
Basically, it seems to me that you are saying that, in effect, owning a firearm is not a right, but is rather a privilege contingent upon one’s ability to afford (at the minimum) an $89 box or $45 case in addition to the cost of the firearm and ammunition.
I don’t how I implied that. I only wanted to say that with the right of ownership and use comes the responsibility to maintain possession from those with bad intent who, under normal conditions, could not otherwise obtain them. I wish to lock mine away in a vault of sorts. That works great for me and not so much for others. I get to lug these heavy bastards around when I move to a new home, and pay for damages done by bolting them to the floor (and have no closet space). One day, I will have to give up on buying safes and will just have to break down and build a specific room for them. That works for me, and not so much for others. I do because I can.
Again, I do not want my habits to be required by law, and I have given my time and money to prevent it from becoming such. Which I know absolutely sets me apart, and in exact opposition, from the Sarah Brady’s of the world, seeing as how their local reps were there in opposition to my point of view.
I don’t condemn folks for using, as you said, less than ideal security measures, I am only trying to educate and lead by example. Again, I only hope that if they can, they do. Which is my only right as a citizen amongst my fellow citizens.
We can disagree about this, or anything else. That is what makes America great: That no matter where I go in this country or position I hold, I cannot make you hold my opinions as your own. Thanks for stopping by and reminding me that I can fuck up something as simple as describing a habit. Everyone needs their head levelled now and then.
Apologies accepted and I offer my apologies again if I misconstrued your meaning. Also for coming on so strong. I freely admit that I got a bit defensive about it.
I hope there are no hard feelings. I can assure you there are none from this side.
By the way, on the fancy word thing:
My mother and father were a bit mismatched. He was a dyed in the wool redneck raised on a farm in a large, dirt poor family. He had little education but had qualities that my mother saw and admired.
My mother was a college educated city girl, very prim and proper. She was a school teacher and was determined that her kids were going to at least be literate if not downright scholastic. She insisted on proper diction, grammar, spelling etc.
The lessons became so ingrained that I have a hard time writing any other way. I know that it sometimes (O.K…most of the time) comes across as pompous. It is something that I need to work on…especially on my blog. I need to work on a more conversational style of writing to make my posts more readable.
I’m really not a pompous person face to face. I’m a down to earth, friendly, helpful country boy at heart. I just don’t know any other way to write.
There are absolutely no hard feeling here, Curt. I’ve read your site, and pompus would be one of the very last words I use.