ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   D.C. (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   General Politics Gun thread... need the wise & well though out opinions of the people of DC (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=269782)

pr_capone 02-07-2013 01:24 AM

Gun thread... need the wise & well though out opinions of the people of DC
 
I would like to know if you would support the following law being enacted.

---

All guns are required to be secured when not in use. This can be done via safe, trigger lock, or a slide lock. This measure is simple gun owner responsibility, will reduce the chances of a gun being in the wrong hands, and does not infringe on the 2nd amendment at all. While the 2nd gives us all the right to own a gun it does not, unfortunately, grant the mental capacity to use it in a responsible manner.

Penalties:

Felony - If an unsecured weapon is used in the commission of a crime by a felon or a person of known mental defect. Forfeiture of all weapons, ammunition, and accessories (loading supplies and equipment, safes, sights, ect) to be sold at public auction. All proceeds from the auction will go towards (Something).

Misdemeanor - If a weapon is found to be unsecured but not used in a crime. Fine and possible jail time. Mandatory gun safety course and probation.

dmahurin 02-07-2013 04:43 AM

Would sitting in my living room with an "unsecured" pistol for home defense be a misdemeanor? If someone breaks in do I call timeout so I can go grab my locked up gun to defend myself?

RubberSponge 02-07-2013 05:45 AM

My military experience guides my in the direction of my beliefs on this. The military learned long ago that securing weapons was the best course of action when not deployed or training.

Direckshun 02-07-2013 05:58 AM

I'm not sure, honestly.

In a state with required gun liability insurance, I would think this would be largely unnecessary.

mr. tegu 02-07-2013 07:33 AM

BUT HOWZ DO WE KNOZ WHOD IZ HAZ A MENTAL DISABILITY?

Saul Good 02-07-2013 07:55 AM

I'm willing to listen. It does not infringe on our right to keep and bear arms, so it's at least an interesting direction. My concern would be how "not in use" is defined.

loochy 02-07-2013 08:18 AM

So some nutcase takes a gun, unlocks it, and goes crazy and it's YOUR fault?

Direckshun 02-07-2013 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loochy (Post 9384422)
So some nutcase takes a gun, unlocks it, and goes crazy and it's YOUR fault?

Maybe the restriction would be you'd have to take reasonable efforts to secure it.

If Danny Ocean was able to crack your safe, there's only so much you could do.

Fish 02-07-2013 08:31 AM

The good guys are doing these things already. And the bad guys won't do this no matter what. And defining/proving what "Secured" means would make this a legal nightmare.

mr. tegu 02-07-2013 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish (Post 9384453)
The good guys are doing these things already. And the bad guys won't do this no matter what. And defining/proving what "Secured" means would make this a legal nightmare.

Capone is a gun owner so he must have some reason to feel these things aren't done already or aren't done by enough people. And I think secured means it can only be operated by one person's hand a la Bond.

Radar Chief 02-07-2013 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr. tegu (Post 9384462)
Capone is a gun owner so he must have some reason to feel these things aren't done already or aren't done by enough people. And I think secured means it can only be operated by one person's hand a la Bond.

I heard on KC talk radio a day or two ago a story about some dumbass that left his handgun out to be cleaned, not knowing it was loaded, toddler comes along grabs it and it goes off killing the toddler.
My first thought is we need to arrest that guy and clip his nuts now before he has a chance to breed another but it could also be the motivation for a topic like this.

King_Chief_Fan 02-07-2013 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr_capone (Post 9384215)
I would like to know if you would support the following law being enacted.

---

All guns are required to be secured when not in use. This can be done via safe, trigger lock, or a slide lock. This measure is simple gun owner responsibility, will reduce the chances of a gun being in the wrong hands, and does not infringe on the 2nd amendment at all. While the 2nd gives us all the right to own a gun it does not, unfortunately, grant the mental capacity to use it in a responsible manner.

Penalties:

Felony - If an unsecured weapon is used in the commission of a crime by a felon or a person of known mental defect. Forfeiture of all weapons, ammunition, and accessories (loading supplies and equipment, safes, sights, ect) to be sold at public auction. All proceeds from the auction will go towards (Something).

Misdemeanor - If a weapon is found to be unsecured but not used in a crime. Fine and possible jail time. Mandatory gun safety course and probation.

this is common sense and most gun owners probably follow this in some vein. you can't legislate common sense

on the second part, what the heck does that mean? As soon as the gun is used it is an unsecured weapon....who thinks this stupid stuff up?

pr_capone 02-07-2013 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar Chief (Post 9384474)
I heard on KC talk radio a day or two ago a story about some dumbass that left his handgun out to be cleaned, not knowing it was loaded, toddler comes along grabs it and it goes off killing the toddler.
My first thought is we need to arrest that guy and clip his nuts now before he has a chance to breed another but it could also be the motivation for a topic like this.

Bingo. This is the exact type of situation that this type of thing would help to curb. Of course there are going to be people who will not abide but this would be a (possibly) effective way to combat situations like Newtown where the kid had his choice from a bunch of unsecured weapons.

Yes... there would need to be more specific definitions but for the purpose of the poll I wish people would simply go by the intent of the OP.

pr_capone 02-07-2013 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan (Post 9384481)
this is common sense and most gun owners probably follow this in some vein. you can't legislate common sense

on the second part, what the heck does that mean? As soon as the gun is used it is an unsecured weapon....who thinks this stupid stuff up?

A gun left out on the counter, which is then stolen and used in a crime, would qualify as an unsecured weapon. Seriously... comprehension. Try it.

loochy 02-07-2013 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr_capone (Post 9384545)
A gun left out on the counter, which is then stolen and used in a crime, would qualify as an unsecured weapon. Seriously... comprehension. Try it.

In YOUR house.

They stole YOUR property.

That is not YOUR fault.

Now if you leave a gun laying around and your little kid plays with it and shoots himself, then yeah, that's negligence and should be punished.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.