Gun thread... need the wise & well though out opinions of the people of DC

[pr_capone]

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.

[pr_capone]

Originally Posted by loochy

In YOUR house.

They stole YOUR property.

That is not YOUR fault.

This really isn't meant for someone coming into your home and carrying your safe out the door. If you report the guns as stolen you are off the hook anyway.

This would be directed more to curbing violence like accidental discharges from kids picking up a gun lying around. It would be an attempt to keep guns out of the hands of kids like the shooter of Newtown who simply went to his mom's closet and had his pick.

[loochy]

Originally Posted by pr_capone

This really isn't meant for someone coming into your home and carrying your safe out the door. If you report the guns as stolen you are off the hook anyway.

This would be directed more to curbing violence like accidental discharges from kids picking up a gun lying around. It would be an attempt to keep guns out of the hands of kids like the shooter of Newtown who simply went to his mom's closet and had his pick.

Assuming a law could be put into words to adequately address this, then yeah, it sounds OK.

I just don't know how one would word such a thing. It's such a judgement call.

[Garcia Bronco]

No. I keep a firearm in my vehicle and it's for protection. Slide locks and trigger locks makes the mechanism total ineffective. I need to be able to level that firearm in seconds to remove the threat.

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by pr_capone

This really isn't meant for someone coming into your home and carrying your safe out the door. If you report the guns as stolen you are off the hook anyway.

This would be directed more to curbing violence like accidental discharges from kids picking up a gun lying around. It would be an attempt to keep guns out of the hands of kids like the shooter of Newtown who simply went to his mom's closet and had his pick.

If you have children around you'll need to secure them and teach the children about them and understand why we have them. It's not an easy discussion to have because you have to expose your children to the nasty dishonorable nature of other human beings.

[FishingRod]

So if 10 innocent people are murdered because their weapon was not readily available to defend their selves and 10 other innocent people don’t accidently kill their selves because, the weapon is locked or locked up did we accomplish anything? What if 10,000 grownups are raped, beaten and or murdered but it saves the lives of 50 children? I haven’t checked the numbers lately but somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 people a year die from gun accidents in this country. Far less than from drinking the cleaner from under the sink. Why is there no nationwide demand that all cleaning supplies be locked up when not in use?

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by FishingRod

So if 10 innocent people are murdered because their weapon was not readily available to defend their selves and 10 other innocent people don’t accidently kill their selves because, the weapon is locked or locked up did we accomplish anything? What if 10,000 grownups are raped, beaten and or murdered but it saves the lives of 50 children? I haven’t checked the numbers lately but somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 people a year die from gun accidents in this country. Far less than from drinking the cleaner from under the sink. Why is there no nationwide demand that all cleaning supplies be locked up when not in use?

Because people as a mob are stupid.

[2bikemike]

Originally Posted by FishingRod

So if 10 innocent people are murdered because their weapon was not readily available to defend their selves and 10 other innocent people don’t accidently kill their selves because, the weapon is locked or locked up did we accomplish anything? What if 10,000 grownups are raped, beaten and or murdered but it saves the lives of 50 children? I haven’t checked the numbers lately but somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 people a year die from gun accidents in this country. Far less than from drinking the cleaner from under the sink. Why is there no nationwide demand that all cleaning supplies be locked up when not in use?

Throw in prescription medication as well, how many lives are destroyed by them after a teenager swiped them from the medicine cabinet? Or liquor, how many kids steal their folks liquor then end up dead or killing someone?

[Dayze]

if it's in my house; it's secured.

it' like someone stealing your car, killing someone in an accident , and you're somehow liable for it because the car was unlocked.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by pr_capone

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.

Would that be logical in any other situations? Say like, if I were promoting a law that said if you left your car unlocked, and someone stole it and ran over somebody, you would be held responsible? Would that make sense? Considering that we don't we enforce that type of thing with any other dangerous device, I'm saying no. Because when you get down to the basis of it, you're punishing one person, for someone else's actions and intents. That leaves a huge gray area in the middle where you have to quantify responsibility between 2 guilty parties.

[bevischief]

Have gun training before buying a gun and have to show proof of said training before purchase of a gun.

[InChiefsHell]

Originally Posted by Fish

Would that be logical in any other situations? Say like, if I were promoting a law that said if you left your car unlocked, and someone stole it and ran over somebody, you would be held responsible? Would that make sense? Considering that we don't we enforce that type of thing with any other dangerous device, I'm saying no. Because when you get down to the basis of it, you're punishing one person, for someone else's actions and intents. That leaves a huge gray area in the middle where you have to quantify responsibility between 2 guilty parties.

Well, it seems that if for instance you and the wife go out of town and your teenager gets into the liquor cabinet, you would be held responsible for whatever went down, even if it was the stupid kid misbehaving.

I dunno. I don't like it. It's not something you could enforce until after the fact, unless you want the cops allowed to just waltz into your house to see if your guns are "secured".

that and the other comments in this thread make me say no, I would not support this. Too many other variables.

I have no problem registering my guns. Coming up with a law so toddlers can't accidentally shoot themselves is ridiculous. As far as the Sandy Hook psycho...he was what, 20 years old? Probably could get around any security she would have had. I suppose it would have worked in that case if she had them in a safe locked away, but then they are useless for self protection.

IMO...bad shit happens. You can't make a law to prevent that.

[InChiefsHell]

Originally Posted by bevischief

Have gun training before buying a gun and have to show proof of said training before purchase of a gun.

Do you have to do that for every gun you buy, or just the first one?

[Fish]

Originally Posted by InChiefsHell

Well, it seems that if for instance you and the wife go out of town and your teenager gets into the liquor cabinet, you would be held responsible for whatever went down, even if it was the stupid kid misbehaving.

I dunno. I don't like it. It's not something you could enforce until after the fact, unless you want the cops allowed to just waltz into your house to see if your guns are "secured".

that and the other comments in this thread make me say no, I would not support this. Too many other variables.

I have no problem registering my guns. Coming up with a law so toddlers can't accidentally shoot themselves is ridiculous. As far as the Sandy Hook psycho...he was what, 20 years old? Probably could get around any security she would have had. I suppose it would have worked in that case if she had them in a safe locked away, but then they are useless for self protection.

IMO...bad shit happens. You can't make a law to prevent that.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. If your child drinks all your vodka and goes and stabs the neighbor, you're not held criminally liable for it. Your child is. You're not going to jail because your kid it. I'm not sure how you mean that you'd be held liable for what your kid did all by themselves.

[InChiefsHell]

Originally Posted by Fish

I'm not sure what you mean by that. If your child drinks all your vodka and goes and stabs the neighbor, you're not held criminally liable for it. Your child is. You're not going to jail because your kid it. I'm not sure how you mean that you'd be held liable for what your kid did all by themselves.

I'm saying if your kid has a friend over who gets all shitty on your booze, then drives away and kill someone in a car accident, YOU can be held liable because you did not secure your booze. Just like a bar not cutting someone off at the right time can be held liable for letting the guy drive drunk.

[Bowser]

I voted no, but I think it's a step in the right direction. I think what turned me off to the idea is possible jail time for a misdemeanor in your scenario. In my mind I'm comparing it to some law requiring me to not leave my keys in my car if it's parked in my garage.

The answer to all of this is simple (sounding) - Get those futuristic guns that will fire only to fingerprints/dna of a single person. Easier to sell, regulate, and track weapons that way.