Reddit reviews Master Lock 90DSPT Keyed Gun Lock, 1 Pack

That's a pretty interesting concept.

The prices might be above what OP's considering @ $40+/month.

I'd suggest a trigger lock and giving that key to a family member for safe-keeping. Don't have to tell them what it's for.

Trigger locks are quite affordable.

Also, most handguns come with a safety cable lock that can make the gun unfuntional. And if not, they are only ~$10.

Obviously a full size safe is best, but many people truly can't afford something like that.

I would say that trigger locks are an acceptable alternative for people with one or two long guns (let's say one rifle and one shotgun) who truly can't otherwise afford a safe.

On the other hand, if you have thousands of dollars in firearms and no safe, I feel no sympathy for you because you could clearly afford it at that point.

It's a trigger lock. /s

​

Trigger lock. Also, personal opinion: They're one step away from worthless.

> Lol that's more than i paid for either of my long guns, its more than double what i paid for my mossberg 500 and literally exactly what i paid for my hand gun. My point stands.

Used? Yeah, you're going to get cheaper than that. MSRP on most guns I've looked at is around $400-500 so my point still stands.

> Are they? got a source? We broke the trigger lock that came with my glock by using a bike lock. To this day i haven't met a cheap gun safe that a pen knife or a crowbar doesn't defeat in under 5 minutes.

I'm glad that you as a toddler had access to a pen knife, crow bar, or a bike lock to wail on this for 5 minutes without anyone noticing you. I'm doubly glad you survived childhood... but taking you at the point you meant to make, that's like saying "Unless you plan on spending $2k on a safe-door style gun safe you shouldn't own guns" or "since a good gun safe is so darned expensive, might as well not try what IS in my price range and just leave my gun out." Neither are good options. Having only a trigger lock isn't a good option either, but it's better than either of those extremes.

> Which so far is you, you're trusting junk to protect your guns and thinking that makes you safe...Not someone who lives alone owning guns without a safe.

I'm cutting out the middle of your statement because it's unimportant. This isn't about you being a hermit, this is about accidents in households with children. People who make 0 attempt to secure their firearm are the problem. If you can't admit this, then you're just trolling.

Or even [less](http://www.Master.com/ Lock 90DSPT Gun Lock https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00004SQM7/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_8zxGzbXDRM4MA). These tragedies are far too common.

"Billionaires" is often just short hand for "Soros". "Dog whistle" doesn't just apply to race, it can be anti-semitic stuff too. Lots of people are talking about Soros and making "Jews run the world" dog whistles recently. It sounded for a moment you were going down that path. Glad you're not, but back to the topic at hand - If you wanted to get something on the ballot, there are ways to get it done and people have done it before without massive funding. The stuff about billionaires is just hot air.

​

As for hand waving, it's is appropriate in this case. An inconvenience is just that - it is not the end of the world or an assault on you. The guy livid at the stadium because he has to wait in line with the rest of the sheeple and who is convinced that concerts would be safer if only everyone had guns instead of this security theater doesn't have a valid gripe. The inconvenience is justified against the long shot possibility of stopping something bad. You're going to have to put up with some very mild one star discomfort during the couple times in a decade you go to buy a gun. Oh well. I think that's an acceptable trade against the possibility of stopping something bad, especially in the case of arming law enforcement with better ways to detect and deter those with guns and severe mental conditions. That part alone justified your indigestion in my book.

​

Finally, I'd love some math ... but you don't seem to be very good at it. $60 + $40 + $25 is less than the $130 cheap gun example. Uh... in your own example with numbers you picked, you failed to show a doubling.

Ha. That's rich. But, I get what what you were trying to show. Sadly, it's fundamentally wrong and an attempt at moving the goal posts.

Your claim was that 1639 would "[double] the cost of firearm ownership", emphasis added. You're just discussing purchase price in the example your provided. I know that you know the difference, so why try to swap them like they are interchangeable. The truth is the cost of firearm ownership will vary from person to person, but for responsible gun owners it would definitely include maintenance, ammunition, training, and gun storage right now. Ammunition is really what makes your claim utterly preposterous since you will definitely feed a gun way more than $25 in ammo (or even $130 in ammo) as part of owning a gun.

That aside, your numbers are wrong. A CPL is required to pick up a pistol today. That'd be RCW 9.41.090 as written now, prior to 1639. You can't try to pad your numbers with costs that are required today (...and is actually $60? I'm confused where the $60 figure is coming from). The safe should similarly be either excluded entirely. The NRA states that you should always store guns so that they are not accessible to unauthorized persons. If you are a responsible gun owner, then you should already own a safe. That little fact aside, 1639 does not compel the purchase of a safe or trigger lock. The minimum requirement in 1639 is that the dealer must offer to sell you a trigger lock or give you one. A responsible gun owner seeking to minimize costs can pick up a trigger lock for $10 on Amazon and be in compliance with 1639. A shitty gun owner can just turn the offer down and still get the gun at $0 added costs.

So, it's not the 96.15% increase over the initial purchase price you depict. It's a 26% increase when looking at bottom of the barrel, lowest cost $130 handgun and granting you the extra $10 cost for buying a new trigger lock to be responsible. The cost for the CPL is required right now. A $40 safe isn't a required purchase at all. Without those fake ass numbers to pad your not-quite-doubling-despite-being-able-to-pick-your-own-numbers math, the math behind your actual claim of "doubling the cost of firearm ownership" doesn't add up in this or any other world.

In other words, the math is not on your side on this.