A Helena student group devoted to preventing gun violence plans to take its cause to the Montana Legislature for the first time next month.
Helena Youth Against Gun Violence was established in February, after 17 people died in a school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. During the legislative session that starts Jan. 7, the group will push for a law that would hold gun owners responsible if a child harms someone with their firearm.
According to Capital High School seniors Clara McRae, co-founder and communications chair, and Amanda Penley, legislative committee chair, the proposed child access prevention law will be based on Texas penal code 46.13.
Child access prevention laws are meant to encourage responsible storage of firearms in homes that are frequented by children.
“Essentially what it does is it puts accountability on the gun owner if a child accesses a gun and harms themselves or others,” said McRae.
Some type of child access prevention law currently exists in 27 states and the District of Columbia. Montana is one of 23 states that don’t have a law of this type.
“We have guns in Montana, that is our Second Amendment right,” said Penley. “But if you choose to leave your firearm unlocked and loaded, that should be on you."

Amanda Penley holds a sign reading "I'm so sick of my peers getting shot at school" at the March for Our Lives demonstration at Memorial Park in March.
Penley said child access prevention seems commonplace when discussing how many states have these laws.
"Our movement against gun violence here in Montana is different than say Detroit or Washington, D.C.," McRae said. She explained the importance of being aware of Montana's gun culture and the value its citizens place on their Second Amendment rights.
The group makes a conscious effort to be aware of its climate. Penley said the group advocates for gun safety and has no intention to take a stance on what kinds of firearms an individual can own.
“It seems like in Montana there is a firearm in most homes,” McRae said. “This is a commonsense regulation which holds you accountable if you take that risk and leave firearms unsecured in a home with children.”
The goal of the law would be to decrease violence such as suicide and accidental death. "The highest proximate cause of gun violence in Montana is suicide and domestic abuse,” McRae said. The group believes that better gun safety could lower the frequency of these incidents.
The strongest child access prevention laws penalize owners when a child simply accesses a negligently stored firearm. Weaker forms of the law only impose that liability when the adult’s conduct is reckless, knowing or intentional.
Almost all of these laws have a built-in exception if the firearm was stored in a locked container. Other exceptions include firearms obtained by illegal entry of the premises, or if the firearm was used in the act of self-defense or for hunting, sport shooting or agricultural purposes.
McRae said the group aims to secure bipartisan support for the proposal. “There are so many states, like Texas, who passed this in a bipartisan manner,” McRae said.
“This is about kids and safety. I think in Montana we take pride in our responsible gun ownership,” Penley said. “This law would further reiterate that idea.”
The group is fairly confident in its ability to get legislation like this passed. “Adults in the Legislature always tell us how hard it is to pass a law,” McRae said. “But we aren’t cynical. We are young, willing to talk and willing to learn.”
“We like to think that in Montana this will pass, but I guess we will see,” Penley said.
Currently the group is working with bill drafters to finalize a draft of the bill. They are also looking for a primary sponsor in the Legislature. They hope to introduce the bill near the end of the session, but their plans are still tentative.
McRae said there had been rumblings about a group like this prior to the Parkland shooting, but this was the catalyst that propelled it forward. “People were fed up before, and ideas of starting a group had been brewing previously,” McRae said.
The group often partners with Moms Demand Action because of their similar goals. “It’s important to support groups with a similar agenda,” said Hannah Simonson, a Helena High School junior and co-committee chair of community engagement.
Simonson said MDA has been very supportive of the student group, which wants to give that support back as often as possible. On Friday, the two groups joined for a memorial in the Capitol rotunda in remembrance of those who died in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, on Dec. 14, 2012.
The group also invited all Helena-area students to its next meeting, which is slated for 6:30 p.m. Wednesday in the Lewis and Clark Library.
“Even if you’re not a traditional believer in gun control, we would still like you to come,” McRae said. “Plus, there is free food.”
Post a comment as
Report
Watch this discussion.
(27) comments
Perhaps there is something in the attractive nuisance doctrine worth looking at.
“Essentially what it does is it puts accountability on the gun owner if a child accesses a gun and harms themselves or others,” said McRae.
There is already a law that addresses this in Montana. Why do we need a new one?
crickets....
Go for it, Young People! I and every other rational, clear-thinking, Montanan are solidly behind you. Please don’t let these few old reactionaries, with far too much time on their hands, discourage you! You are doing the right thing and you’re giving us hope for the future of the country we all love!
So people that disagree with you are irrational and incapable of thought? Trying to blame someone for something with an argument based on nothing other than emotion is pretty much the definition of reactionary. How do you not see that?
And too much time? The number one and number two most common commenters on the IR articles are both liberals. Curious.
Dan Clerget said "The number one and number two most common commenters on the IR articles are both liberals. "
Are you afraid to name names?
Yes young people. Willingly start dismantling your rights and freedoms because your teachers told you to. Don't look at any data or question any data. The trend for firearm related deaths is down and when even fivethirtyeight starts pointing out the CDC's bad data well... You know the bs is deep.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-cdc-is-publishing-unreliable-data-on-gun-injuries-people-are-using-it-anyway/
I am glad to see these young people get involved in the political process. Regardless of how you feel about their position, it is this type of involvement that makes democracy work.
Exactly!
I can't think of anything more likely to result in poor outcomes than listening to a bunch of high schoolers about anything.
Yeah, we sure don't want them to ruin all the great outcomes we grownups have produced.
Dean Cauley said "I can't think of anything more likely to result in poor outcomes than listening to a bunch of high schoolers about anything."
It goes to show that you don't really know much about high schoolers.
With our good weather, shouldn't you be touching up the paint on the "Get off my lawn" signage?
We were all that young once and trying to pretend we weren't equally dumb as all heck is just bs. I didn't have a real clue until I was in my early 30's. Unless you're proposing that insurance agencies and actuaries must be wrong with all that data they have regarding kids and their cognitive and decision making ability? They're kids. They should go live in the world and learn a few things starting with the basics.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208795/One-university-students-boil-egg-quite-happily-set-broadband.html
https://twitter.com/KDKA/status/1073257533324840960/video/1
Dean, what you are trying to do is to compare what teens needed to know when you were young to today and that is the flaw in your position.
So what if more know how to install a broadband connection than how to boil an egg? If they NEED to boil an egg their look up how to do it on YouTube.
Your generalization ignores that much of the technological revolution that has taken place in the past 30-years or so is fueled by the very people you accuse as being "equally dumb" as you were.
You said "They should go live in the world and learn a few things starting with the basics."
It sounds like you want to censor speech by young people. The last time I checked the Constitution I didn't see that Freedom of Speech had an age restriction.
I have an idea! Let's just constantly hover around our children and shield them from everything all the time! No child is ever curious, so they won't pay attention to anything that mommy and daddy say is mean...
OR, we could teach our kids to NOT play with guns, or anytging else they haven't learned about for that matter, you know, like we do with scissors? But, that would require effort, and blaming someone else is so much easier!!
Progressive families take the time to teach their children about different sexual preferences, race inequity, and cultures, but for some reason they are often COMPLETELY AGAINST teaching them about a very large culture that surrounds them, the gun culture. Not very open minded. I'll bet if a group of kids had a walkout and tried to EDUCATE fellow students on the safe handling of a firearm, they would have to close their social media accounts because of all the HATE flying their way. Sad.
Dan Clerget said "Progressive families take the time to teach their children about different sexual preferences, race inequity, and cultures, but for some reason they are often COMPLETELY AGAINST teaching them about a very large culture that surrounds them, the gun culture."
How do you know that? Or have you just pulled that out of the place where the sun doesn't shine?
Do these kids in this article sound like they've been taught anything about guns? They don't to me. I didn't even have to insult you to answer your question. :) Excellent job at reinforcing the stereotype Clay, you NEVER let me down there!! :)
Dan Clerget said "Do these kids in this article sound like they've been taught anything about guns? "
The article doesn't provide enough information to draw that conclusion but it sure didn't stop you from doing so and making a generalized statement about certain types of parents.
You said "I didn't even have to insult you to answer your question."
Challenging your unsupportable claim was an insult to you? That figures. It's probably a good thing the topic isn't religion or I could make your head explode.
Dan, there's just no limit to how sad those imaginary liberals can be! Same with imaginary conservatives. The world is a lot less sad when we deal with actual people with actual values and beliefs.
I am familiar with the Texas law, and as of today, I am not aware of any prosecutions that resulted because of it.
Firearms manufactures, because of a federal law passed are pretty much exempt of liability because of actions of the purchaser of their firearms. So now we have groups trying to make that firearm purchaser libel. Of course I don't remember a case here in Montana that has been reported that would fit into this category these young people are trying to address.
Those who commit crimes with guns are solely responsible for those crimes, just as the drunk driver is solely responsible when they get behind the wheel of a car, no matter who owns it.
We are not going to solve this situation by looking to make someone other than the individual committing the act responsible. The individual who pulls the trigger accepts and deserves the responsibility of the act.
Unless society is willing to accept that people who commit acts of violence are solely responsible for those acts, we are going to continue down a non productive path.
Hold the criminal responsible, not the person who made a lawful purchase, because the blame belongs with the one who commits the crime.
Donald Jackson said "We are not going to solve this situation by looking to make someone other than the individual committing the act responsible."
At least you recognize that we have a "situation." What would be your solution to dealing with it?
Donald, you seem to be missing the point. We generally accept the idea that children are of limited responsibility.
I have no misunderstanding at all, We had many guns when I grew up, but we had a lot less shooting because our parents and mentors taught about those guns. There was no shying away from them. We were taught about guns in school, we carried guns in our trucks for after school hunting. We didn't have people including teenagers running around shooting schools up.
We may accept that children have limited responsibility, but we as parents and mentors are still responsible for teaching the younger generations about things that may hurt them or others and I don't happen to think people are doing that now a days.
These are kids with no proper argument or intelligence. Hopefully the Legislature will not take them seriously.
Saying that gun owners should be responsible for what happens with their firearms is not a "proper argument or intelligence?"
But clay, you keep telling us you support the 2nd amendment.
John, I do. I have said repeatedly that it's not going to be infringed upon and we need to learn to accept gun-related deaths as human sacrifices to preserving it instead of wringing our hands over something like another school shooting.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.