CNN These are the Victims of Santa Fe Shooting
Well based on the G2A Gun Control Plan... (copied below for convenience) I am thinking that #6 and #7 are applicable to this shooting. And I think the "GUN OWNER", the young man's Father should be sentenced to whatever his Son gets. It was his responsibility to keep his guns secure from use by his unstable son. When will we start holding gun owners responsible for keeping their weapons secure?
_______________________________
Just an FYI, I am busily globe trotting again and being in China kept me from posting. (reminder: my blog is hosted by a google application) Here is what the "glamor" of business travel looks like...
Fortunately my Delhi 3 day meeting got condensed to a 2 day meeting, so if I can get caught up on my sleep and work... Maybe I can squeeze in a few hours of being a tourist. If I do I will share some photos, but with an average high temperature of 110 degrees Fahrenheit for the next few days. My "hotel room / office" is feeling pretty comfortable. :-)
_________________________________
G2A's Simplified Gun Policy Goal Statement:
Well based on the G2A Gun Control Plan... (copied below for convenience) I am thinking that #6 and #7 are applicable to this shooting. And I think the "GUN OWNER", the young man's Father should be sentenced to whatever his Son gets. It was his responsibility to keep his guns secure from use by his unstable son. When will we start holding gun owners responsible for keeping their weapons secure?
_______________________________
Just an FYI, I am busily globe trotting again and being in China kept me from posting. (reminder: my blog is hosted by a google application) Here is what the "glamor" of business travel looks like...
- Tuesday depart MSP and Wednesday Night arrive Shanghai
- Thursday Noon depart Shanghai for Guiyang
- Friday night depart Guiyang for Shanghai
- Saturday night depart Shanghai for Delhi (arrive 2 AM)
- Thankfully I get to settle into this hotel for a few days
- Thursday depart Delhi at 3:30 AM and arrive MSP on Thursday afternoon
Fortunately my Delhi 3 day meeting got condensed to a 2 day meeting, so if I can get caught up on my sleep and work... Maybe I can squeeze in a few hours of being a tourist. If I do I will share some photos, but with an average high temperature of 110 degrees Fahrenheit for the next few days. My "hotel room / office" is feeling pretty comfortable. :-)
_________________________________
G2A's Simplified Gun Policy Goal Statement:
- Ensure that trained, responsible people can keep and carry their hunting and self defense weapons.
- Ensure these weapons are removed from the homes of scary angry, insane and generally irresponsible people.
- Minimize the death, injury and/or trauma to the innocent citizens of the USA when the system fails and a scary angry, insane and generally irresponsible person does not have their weapons confiscated.
G2A's Supporting Policy / Tools
- Mandatory back ground checks for every gun purchase or ownership transfer. Eliminate gun show / internet sales loop holes.
- Mandatory confiscation of guns from people with anger issues / restraining orders. (Red Flag Laws)
- Improve NICS, and State and Agency reporting into the database.
- Mandatory Gun Registration (especially for hand guns and semi-automatic rifles)
- Severe penalties for ANYONE holding a gun that is NOT registered, that should be.
- Allow law suits against people who allow their guns to be stolen, especially if they have not reported the theft.
- Allow trained school personnel to conceal and carry.
- Limiting clip sizes to ~15 or fewer bullets
- Banning weapons that are bump fire-able.
43 comments:
My policy is just to stay away from places where I might get shot. Whenever I go to the Chopin Society concert, I eye the crowd carefully. Second amendment freedoms are great, but they do come with a price.
--Hiram
I have no issue with the right to own a pistol and a shotgun.
I do have a problem with the owner not being responsible enough to keep them secure from their mentally disturbed child.
And if society wants to grant the freedom, it should also hold the owner accountable for being irresponsible.
Similar but different story
At least this gun owner paid for her errors.
I am tired of being shot at. Not being shot at should be a constitutional right too.
--Hiram
Have you been shot at?
Have you been struck by lightning?
Random mass shootings are unacceptable and should be addressed however our cheeseburgers and fries are much more likely to kill us...
Let me get this straight. Something gets stolen from your house and YOU get charged with a crime?
I have been shot at. Did government interfere with my rights, or was that the fault of the high-as-a-kite rapist I was chasing?
Yes. Irresponsible gun owners who do not keep their guns secure or take part in straw purchases should be held accountable for how that weapon was used.
With the right to bear arms comes the responsibility to keep them secure and out of the hands of criminals / mentally unstable people.
Frontline How do criminals get Guns
Sources of Chicago guns
If some idiot keeps his gun loaded in his bedroom, it is stolen and used to kill a child. Yes that irresponsible owner should be held accountable.
Our society granted him a freedom, and he abused it.
So, how is having your gun inside your locked house, nobody else there, not keeping it secure? Yes, if you have a mentally "off" son, you need extra measures, but suppose the kid breaks the lock? Still your fault? You're really only one step away from those crazy anti-gun nuts who want to sue the manufacturers for producing a TOOL that somebody misused.
Houses are not very secure... All that glass...
Now this is safe.
I agree that the owner gets a pass if he can prove the gun(s) were stolen from a "real gun safe" and he reports the theft immediately.
The owner gets a pass if he can prove the guns were stolen. Period. And you seem to want to absolve the thief and murderer of all charges, regardless. Where are your priorities, and, no insult intended, your sense of reality?
I don't want to absolve anyone of anything.
I want them all held accountable for their contribution to the deaths.
Where as you seem to want to let irresponsible or fraudulent gun owners of the hook.
Next you will be saying that companies who sell tainted food or medicines can not be sued...
No, those who sell defective products need to make it right. If they do it knowingly, they should be prosecuted. But guns work exactly as intended. So do knifes, fists and baseball bats. That does not stop any of them from being misused, but that is neither the fault of the original purchaser, should they be stolen, or of the manufacturer.
I suppose we could mandate a label that says "might kill people" on all of those things. Do you think that will stop a single murder with any of them? Did you see England is looking to ban pointed knifes, except for butchers and fishmongers? Why do we laugh?
Sorry, gun owners should be held accountable for keeping their guns secure.
Just as:
- Farmers are held accountable if weed spray hurts a neighbor's crops
- Drivers are held accountable if they cause an accident
- Businesses are accountable if pollution from their facility gets into a stream
- a child hurts themselves playing in your yard
I am not sure why you want to protect irresponsible people again.
–Farmers who have their chemicals stolen are not liable.
–Drivers who have their cars stolen are not liable.
–Businesses are liable if their pollution gets into a stream. They are NOT responsible if someone opens their tanks and allows that pollution to occur.
–A homeowner is not liable if the yard is fenced and locked. Nor are they liable if the child brings the harmful Instrument with them.
I am not sure why you want to protect lawbreakers by suggesting someone else shares the liability. if somebody steals a gun from a gun store, is the gun store liable? If somebody steals a police officers gun, is the police officer liable? Can he be found guilty of his own shooting?
All of the above people are expected to perform due diligence, and can be held accountable if they fail.
It is only the gun owners that you want to shield for some reason.
If the officer is shot with his own gun... He has already paid for his irresponsible behavior.
"It is only the gun owners that you want to shield for some reason."
WRONG, and that makes no sense whatsoever. I want to hold gun owners to the exact same standard. If someone steals something from you and commits a crime with it, it is the criminal who is liable, not you, and not the victim.
So, officers engage in "irresponsible behavior" when they walk into dangerous situations where their own weapon might be taken and used against them? Let's fire every last one of them for being so irresponsible! That should solve the problem, right? If it weren't for police there would be no crime?
As usual, we will need to agree to disagree.
I think owners of weapons should be held accountable for keeping them secured.
Or at a minimum reporting immediately the transfer of ownership and/or theft.
OK, are you going to include owners of kitchen knives, baseball bats, bicycle chains, automobiles and ceremonial swords in that liability?
You still insist that the inanimate object is the cause of the problem, rather than the evil that lurks in the hearts of men.
Just guns, they are especially made for killing.
guns don't kill people; people do.
And I will Ask it again, do you really believe that someone determined to violate the laws against murder several times over are going to be deterred by some misdemeanor gun charge? especially when they are already willing to die to commit their heinous acts?
I think that if legal gun owners know they face big fines and/or prison time for losing track of their gun(s)... They will do a much better job of keeping them secure...
And be much quicker to call the police if they lose their gun.
And the straw purchases would stop.
Please remember that this is only one part of the bigger proposal that allows people to own guns, while reducing the gun black market.
The straw purchases would stop? Really? The kind of person who would do a straw purchase, like the San Bernadino killers, would forget all about their planned bloodbath and not acquire their guns illegally?
The only way to stop the black market in guns is to... oh, wait... there is no way. Most of the guns used in these things are acquired and/or possessed illegally already.
Most guns were legal... Until someone let them become illegal...
I am not trying to dissuade the killers...
I am working to dissuade their accomplices who we allowed to legally by a gun. And then chose to transfer them for profit or lost them because they were irresponsible.
Someone "let them" become illegal? By having them securely locked in your house, or selling them to a straw purchaser? You're starting to sound like those folks suing the gun manufacturers for the misuse of their product. Maybe we should put a warning label on them? Or those who claim a "right not to be shot."
No. We should put people who sell their guns to questionable customers for profit, or allow them to be easily stolen in jail.
"Allow them to be easily stolen"-- define "easily." and selling illegal guns to felons is already seriously illegal, as are straw purchases.
There is an old legal doctrine known as "the intent follows the bullet." That means that unless I intentionally fire my gun (which I cannot if it's stolen) it doesn't matter where the bullet goes, I have no culpability.
Hopefully we can increase that culpability in the future.
Why? To what purpose? Is it like frivolous lawsuits that seek the "deep pockets" rather than apportioning liability?
You want to continue to conflate lawful gun owners with crazed murderers, and it makes no sense to me. We should be able to distinguish the two and place blame for crazed shootings on the crazed shooters. Or are we going to let them blame "bullies" or somebody else for their horrible acts?
If somebody steals a gun and uses it to hunt pheasants, can the gun owner be fined for hunting without a license?
If a gun owner uses their personal data to gain permission to own a gun... They should OWN the gun.
The good news is that with every mass shooting the people of our country are getting less tolerant of the ... "I get to own a gun, but am not responsible for where it goes or how it is used" cop out.
Our society allowing citizens to own guns is very special and comes with a great deal of responsibility. Unfortunately folks like yourself want the right without the responsibility.
It is almost as bad as welfare folks demanding entitlements while saying they don't need to be responsible for working.
yes, and it is already illegal for it to be otherwise. You do not seem to realize that passing a law does not stop people from breaking that law. By your own assessment, it is impossible for almost all of the mass shootings of the last 20 years to have taken place at all, since 90% of them have taken place in "gun free zones."
People with guns, whether they own them OR NOT, bear the responsibility for the usage they make of them. Let us hold them fully responsible for that use, and forget about punishing the innocent bystanders. Next thing you will be telling me is that kids who go to school are irresponsible for being shot while there. It makes about as much sense. After all, they are the ones who trusted the government declaration that their school was a "gun free zone."
Nope.
I will blame the shooter and the gun owner who did adequately control their gun.
Where the shooter and the gun owner are the same person, I agree. Otherwise you must blame the one most directly responsible. (And I think you forgot a "not" in there somewhere.)
Actually we can hold both people accountable...
It happens often... The primary criminal and those who enabled/assisted.
That is my preference...
Sure, the illegal straw purchaser or the criminal gun transfer, both committed crimes and bear full responsibility for that crime and ancillary responsibility for any subsequent crime-- "accessory before the fact." The gun owner who unwillingly "transferred" his gun by having it stolen, no. If you can prove he /willingly/ "allowed" the theft, see above.
We often put people in jail or sue people for their negligence...
We do not require criminal intent to do so.
Deaths occurring due to distracted driving, people injured by police, etc.
A gun owner who does not adequately secure their weapon, or neglects to report its loss should be no different.
here is a conundrum for you. Suppose an honest citizen buys a gun, for his own use, secures it inside his locked home, and somebody breaks in and steals it. KNOWING he will be liable for anything done with that gun, now completely outside his control, Is he more or less likely to report that theft? And regardless of the reason for the owner's reticence in reporting, if the gun is used in a crime, how can it be traced back to the original owner?
We've all seen it on TV-- the DA will offer a deal to the criminal if they will divulge where they got the gun. Chances are very good it was NOT bought through a licensed dealer. a source for you
The guns started out legal at some time.
If you have a better way to ensure the Legal Owner keeps them that way...
Let's hear it.
A better way than what? I don't think anybody spends $500-1500 for a firearm and then leaves it lying about where anybody can walk off with it. My cat, maybe, but he's not worth $1k.
And yet 80% of firearms used in crimes are "illegal"...
Someone is letting them go into that market. Either intentionally or due to irresponsibility.
"letting them"? I think that's the source of our disagreement. Nobody buys a gun and "intentionally" lets it go unless they are being reimbursed-- i.e. straw purchaser. That's illegal. Nobody steals a gun-- that's illegal. You cannot sell a gun you obtained illegally to someone not allowed to have a gun, that's illegal. It's the same old problem as mass shootings. If a criminal is determined to violate the laws against armed robbery or murder, will they really be worried about breaking a little gun law? Laws do not stop crime! Criminals by definition break laws and law-abiding citizens by definition do not. The solution, as always, lies in identifying criminals before or after the crime and taking them out of the society.
As I said before... We will need to disagree...
Leaving your gun on the bed side table is not adequately secure to me... It needs to be kept in a secure gun safe... Free of kids, thieves, etc.
If it is okay for people to sell their used gun...
And no one tracks the sales or has to report them like the sale of a car...
How would one stop these illegal transfers or hold anyone accountable for them?
We as a society should know where every hand gun and semi-automatic rifle is in the country. And if the owner can not account for theirs, they should be punished.
If you live alone and lock your doors, or even if you don't lock up, you have "secured" your gun. Keeping it away from your kids, absolutely prudent and we shouldn't even need a law.
But gun registration? Absolutely not. Pass a law that says criminals cannot have or use guns, and when it is 100% effective we can talk about the law-abiding citizens.
I assume this is that irrational fear of yours that the government is going to come seize them all.
It always makes me sad that you are willing to sacrifice children's lives over that fear... :-)
The only reason I am willing to "sacrifice children's lives" is to trade them for the Millions of lives saved by personal gun use every year. Somehow leaving victims defenseless does not seem like a good strategy for defending victims.
Or look at it another way. Suppose we DO register all law-abiding guns and the government does NOT, as has happened many times in history, take them away? How many unregistered guns will the criminals still have? What good will come from knowing who originally owned a gun that was stolen and used in a crime? Explain how this is NOT just about blaming (and punishing) law-abiding citizens who want to defend themselves or enjoy sports for the actions of criminals and the mentally ill?
Post a Comment