I no longer have children in the house, my youngest turned 40 this year, so that's not a problem.
I do answer when there is a blank that asks if I own a gun or if there is a gun in the house.
I answer honestly, and the answer I give is "no". I do not own
A gun, and there is not
A gun in the house.
If you were taught proper English, the article "a" is singular.
What worries me more, at the moment, is a State Governor (or any elected official at any, and every level or authority) who believes that their oath of office is not absolute, and is dumb enough to publicly say so.
If an oath can be modified or altered, any part ignored at the oath taker's whim (emergency or NOT) then the oath is non-binding and invalid.
Consider the implications of that. IF the SWORN oath of office is not binding, how can any sworn oath be, including sworn testimony in court. And, by extension all oaths or promises in general???
Doesn't that mean that no govt official, no police officer, no doctor, no ONE can be trusted because they swore and oath??
since that is apparently what the NM Governor believes, why aren't the police included in her "no carry" order???
Doesn't seem to be "equal treatment under the law" to me.....
Remember the Lautenberg Amendment (law) that turned misdemeanor domestic violence convictions into lifetime bar to firearms possession?? It did NOT exempt the police, or the military. It applied to them as individuals, on duty AND off.
Lots (some estimates run as high as thousands) of police officers (and military) were legally barred from having a gun, even in the official course of their duties.
WHY isn't the NM Gov following that precendent? Aren't these things that should be publically asked and responded to?? OR should that governor just be recalled and sent packing for politically terminal stupidity??