Criminals get guns because people who buy them legally are irresponsible.
And you know this ...... How????
Most people I know who own firearms are more responsible than those making statements like the above.
This would provide an incentive to be responsible.
Most firearm owners are responsible. If they were not, more guns would be loose on the street than there already are. Go after the few who are irresponsible rather than the 99.9% who are.
The fact is, that most illegal guns in the U.S. (with the exception of the minority that are imported illegally) began their life as a legal weapon. Somewhere along the line, either from a manufacturer, or a retailer, or a consumer, that gun was diverted from the national inventory of legal guns to become an illegal one. That means that somewhere along the line, either the manufacturer, or the retailer, or the consumer, did or failed to do something that allowed that gun to be diverted into the illegal sphere. And virtually nothing is done to hold them accountable for it.
Making the last known legitimate owner criminally responsible for what is done with the gun once it becomes illegal (i.e. charging them with murder if it is used to commit murder) would be a good start, because most guns become illegal either through the complicity or the carelessness of their legitimate owners.
"Hang on while I log in to the James Webb telescope to search the known universe for who the fuck asked you." -- James Fell
It is ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW to harm someone with a gun. Most U.S. jurisdictions include enhanced penalties for harming someone with a gun as compared to harming people by other means. Most jurisdictions include enhanced penalties for committing any crime with a gun, which is why bank robbers hand the teller a fucking NOTE rather than showing them a gun.
If you do so negligently (and not as part of an intentional wrongful - criminal - act), YOU ARE ALREADY SUBJECT TO SUIT FOR DAMAGES.
Anyone who would even suggest that compulsory insurance be required in order to exercise a Constitutional right is not fit to hold public office.
Except in California. Where I'm sure these idiots fit right in.
either through the complicity or the carelessness of their legitimate owners.
I have no problem with that. Oh wait, mom's dead. must be the gun dealers fault as he didn't check to see that her unstable son may or may not have lived with her when she bought the guns and made sure she locked them up (which, I agree, she should have done)
because most guns become illegal either through the complicity or the carelessness of their legitimate owners.
Do you have any support for that?
Other than common sense? How many guns are stolen from their legitimate owners at gunpoint, with a choice between handing over the guns or dying? Any other type of theft means the gun was not securely stored.
"Hang on while I log in to the James Webb telescope to search the known universe for who the fuck asked you." -- James Fell
either through the complicity or the carelessness of their legitimate owners.
I have no problem with that. Oh wait, mom's dead.
Yes, there is the occasional case where those who are complicit in criminal acts are killed in the commission of those acts, and so cannot be brought to justice. Does that negate the principle?
"Hang on while I log in to the James Webb telescope to search the known universe for who the fuck asked you." -- James Fell
Other than common sense? How many guns are stolen from their legitimate owners at gunpoint, with a choice between handing over the guns or dying? Any other type of theft means the gun was not securely stored.
So no data.
Yes, there is the occasional case where those who are complicit in criminal acts are killed in the commission of those acts, and so cannot be brought to justice. Does that negate the principle?
Never said it does.
From day one I blamed mom for not keeping the guns secure especially knowing her son was not "right in the head".
dales wrote:Very good - like I posted in another thread.........if 99/100 people are causing all the bloodshead (armed criminals) why should I be left holding the bag?
99% of gun violence is caused by armed criminals?
I don't think you really believe that Dales... I know I don't.
Why is it that when Miley Cyrus gets naked and licks a hammer it's 'art' and 'edgy' but when I do it I'm 'drunk' and 'banned from the hardware store'?
Making the last known legitimate owner criminally responsible for what is done with the gun once it becomes illegal (i.e. charging them with murder if it is used to commit murder)
That's a proposal that's going to go absolutely no where....it will have nearly zero popular or legislative support, and absolutely zero judicial support....
If a person steals my car and deliberately runs over somebody with it, I'm not going to be charged with murder, and car ownership isn't a Constitutional right....
Where should this principle end? If somebody steals a knife out of my kitchen and stabs somebody to death with it should I be charged with murder? How about if they steal a chainsaw or some other gardening implement and commit a murder with it? A pair of pruning shears, a shovel, a hatchet?
What if they steal a pillow and smother somebody with it, or hang somebody using a stolen garden hose?
I will give you one hundred trillion dollars a day for one trillion days if you can show me anywhere in the US where owning a car requires insurance. (It may in Australia, but I rather doubt it.)
Making the last known legitimate owner criminally responsible for what is done with the gun once it becomes illegal (i.e. charging them with murder if it is used to commit murder)
That's a proposal that's going to go absolutely no where....it will have nearly zero popular or legislative support, and absolutely zero judicial support....
If a person steals my car and deliberately runs over somebody with it, I'm not going to be charged with murder, and car ownership isn't a Constitutional right....
Where should this principle end? If somebody steals a knife out of my kitchen and stabs somebody to death with it should I be charged with murder? How about if they steal a chainsaw or some other gardening implement and commit a murder with it? A pair of pruning shears, a shovel, a hatchet?
What if they steal a pillow and smother somebody with it, or hang somebody using a stolen garden hose?
...or steal your car and run someone over with it. By the "logic" of this idea (which I will charitably call "idiotic"), if someone steals my car and kills someone with it, I should be responsible.
It's an attempt at a back-door gun ban, no more and no less.
because most guns become illegal either through the complicity or the carelessness of their legitimate owners.
Do you have any support for that?
Other than common sense? How many guns are stolen from their legitimate owners at gunpoint, with a choice between handing over the guns or dying? Any other type of theft means the gun was not securely stored.
Banks and corprorate offices with secure vaults are robbed, but I guess they're at fault for not storing the contents more securely? Come on. Right now if there is negligience in the sotoring of a weapon some sort of liability may attach, but not if it's proerly stored. Of course nothing can be stored with complete security.
Making the last known legitimate owner criminally responsible for what is done with the gun once it becomes illegal (i.e. charging them with murder if it is used to commit murder)
That's a proposal that's going to go absolutely no where....it will have nearly zero popular or legislative support, and absolutely zero judicial support....
If a person steals my car and deliberately runs over somebody with it, I'm not going to be charged with murder, and car ownership isn't a Constitutional right....
Where should this principle end? If somebody steals a knife out of my kitchen and stabs somebody to death with it should I be charged with murder? How about if they steal a chainsaw or some other gardening implement and commit a murder with it? A pair of pruning shears, a shovel, a hatchet?
What if they steal a pillow and smother somebody with it, or hang somebody using a stolen garden hose?
...or steal your car and run someone over with it. By the "logic" of this idea (which I will charitably call "idiotic"), if someone steals my car and kills someone with it, I should be responsible.
It's an attempt at a back-door gun ban, no more and no less.
Ridiculous non-arguments comparing lethal weapons with items which happen to be capable of being used as lethal weapons. I can't believe that right-thinking people still trot this one out without seemingly a shred of embarrassment. It smacks more of paranoia than rational thought...
Why is it that when Miley Cyrus gets naked and licks a hammer it's 'art' and 'edgy' but when I do it I'm 'drunk' and 'banned from the hardware store'?
