Which is it? On Wednesday, July 16. 2025, Rutgers University published this contradictory study, “Researchers track the willingness of gun owners to temporarily store guns outside their homes.”
Rutgers researchers have found that firearm owners are more likely to consider temporary out-of-home storage when worried about the safety of others.
Their study reveals that firearm owners prioritize the safety of household members over their own self-protection when deciding whether to temporarily store their firearms outside the home. At the same time, many remain concerned about leaving the home defenseless.
Researchers surveyed 3,018 U.S. adults living in households with firearms through an online survey. The respondents were asked who lived in a home with a firearm and their willingness to temporarily store their firearms with either firearm retailers or law enforcement.
The findings, appearing inJAMA Network Open, illustrate that firearm owners and their family members were willing to store with retailers. Thirty-four percent of the respondents said they were willing to store their firearms with law enforcement agencies.
“Our findings show that firearm owners are more willing to temporarily store their firearms with retailers and law enforcement when they’re concerned about protecting others in their household rather than themselves, but are also concerned about leaving the home unprotected,” said Jennifer Paruk, lead author of the study and a postdoctoral fellow at the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center.
“I can’t think of a single situation where anyone would want to temporarily relinquish their firearms to retailers or law enforcement.” said Thomas Robb, avid Second Amendment supporter and National Director of the Knights Party of the Ku Klux Klan, centrally based out of Harrison, Arkansas. “Most people today who purchase a firearm do it for their, and their families safety, so why would one purchase a firearm and then give it to anyone to ‘temporarily’ hold? Rutgers University doesn’t give a plausible reasoning for this action, but anyone should be safe in a home with a firearm if they do it responsibly. Also, Rutgers Universuty contradicts themselves saying that someone who cares more about the safety of others in the household than themselves, would be willing to let either a retailer or law enforcement agency temporarily hold their firearms, but in the same sentence say that they would be concerned about leaving the home unprotected. This makes no sense to me. Do they mean that they may be having a relative visit that is a crazed lunatic? Or maybe have children in the house? Whatever their reasoning is, as long as you’re a responsible gun owner, there is no reason to surrender your firearms to anyone. I own firearms, and I also have children and grandchildren who visit my home regularly and my firearms are properly stored safely. Whether it be a gun safe or a trigger guard, there are safe ways of storing a firearm. This article seems to be written by someone in kindergarten, not a university.”
