Gun sales way up.

#101
#101
am I liable for damages (other than my own) if someone steals my car and then hits or kills someone?

the injuries you're talking about also do not involve the original owner (the responsible party). They are all on the criminal you're absolving of ultimate responsibility
 
#103
#103
bleedorange1983 said:
Having a firearm stolen from your home or vehicle by an intruder is in no way "negligence".
Click to expand...


The law on what constiututes negligent storage would be debated. I have my own ideas about that, with which you might disagree. But likely each state would enact its own statutes describing the requirements for non-negligent storage, and some would leave it to traditional tort principles, with each side in a case arguing about what is, and is not, the correct standard of care.

Using the automobile insurance example again, that question is asked and answered everyday across this country.



Example: I personally think having a gun stored in a car is per se negligent. That is, if you have a gun and keep it in your car and it is stolen, then you are automatically deemed at fault for any harm caused by the gun.

Result? No one stores guns in their car anymore. What's wrong with that?
 
#104
#104
utvolpj said:
am I liable for damages (other than my own) if someone steals my car and then hits or kills someone?

the injuries you're talking about also do not involve the original owner (the responsible party). They are all on the criminal you're absolving of ultimate responsibility
Click to expand...

This has been discussed. Libs think guns are for killing people while cars are transportation. Even tho cars kill many more people than guns
 
#107
#107
VolsNSkinsFan said:
This has been discussed. Libs think guns are for killing people while cars are transportation. Even tho cars kill many more people than guns
Click to expand...

guess so. I can honestly say that I have never known anyone whose primary reason for owning a gun is to kill someone (and I know a lot of gun owners)

lawgator1 said:
imo, stored in gun safe is not negligent.

Stuck behind Aunt Matilda's nightgown = negligent.
Click to expand...

having a gun accessible when someone is trying to harm me = not negligent ever
 
#108
#108
utvolpj said:
guess so. I can honestly say that I have never known anyone whose primary reason for owning a gun is to kill someone (and I know a lot of gun owners)
Click to expand...


My suggestion is specific to handguns.

There is no other purpose for a handgun than to shoot another person. (Spare me the "Well, you COULD use it for some other reason." We all know the sole purpose when bought is to fire a bullet at another human being.)
 
#109
#109
utvolpj said:
having a gun accessible when someone is trying to harm me = not negligent ever
Click to expand...


I should have been specific about it being handguns. Clarified above.

And if you want to own a handgun and have it handy for self protection, that is your choice. But your choice is costing me money. And so I am shifting back to you, hopefully via insurance, the cost of you making that choice.

I am not saying you can't have one. I am not saying you can't have it at the ready in two seconds. I am saying that, because you have it at the ready and it is thereby so easily stolen, then I want you to pay for it (via insurance, hopefully) when someone is shot with your gun.
 
#110
#110
lawgator1 said:
My suggestion is specific to handguns.

There is no other purpose for a handgun than to shoot another person. (Spare me the "Well, you COULD use it for some other reason." We all know the sole purpose when bought is to fire a bullet at another human being.)
Click to expand...

I hunted with lots of guys that carry it for protection when hunting out west. My dad hates handguns and that is the only reason he owns one. Please spare me any post that tries to show you understand anything about firearms
 
#111
#111
lawgator1 said:
I should have been specific about it being handguns. Clarified above.

And if you want to own a handgun and have it handy for self protection, that is your choice. But your choice is costing me money. And so I am shifting back to you, hopefully via insurance, the cost of you making that choice.

I am not saying you can't have one. I am not saying you can't have it at the ready in two seconds. I am saying that, because you have it at the ready and it is thereby so easily stolen, then I want you to pay for it (via insurance, hopefully) when someone is shot with your gun.
Click to expand...

my choice costs you absolutely zero. The choice of a criminal to break in and steal my property for the purpose of committing a crime is what costs you. Please get this basic concept and we can move on from this ridiculous idea of yours
 
#112
#112
utvolpj said:
I hunted with lots of guys that carry it for protection when hunting out west. My dad hates handguns and that is the only reason he owns one. Please spare me any post that tries to show you understand anything about firearms
Click to expand...


LOL, wut?

Handguns while hunting for self protection?

Against what? Bears? Deer? Rabbits? Quail?

Please.
 
#113
#113
utvolpj said:
my choice costs you absolutely zero. The choice of a criminal to break in and steal my property for the purpose of committing a crime is what costs you. Please get this basic concept and we can move on from this ridiculous idea of yours
Click to expand...


If you safely and responsibly store it to so as to prevent it from being stolen, then there is nothing to worry about.
 
#114
#114
lawgator1 said:
LOL, wut?

Handguns while hunting for self protection?

Against what? Bears? Deer? Rabbits? Quail?

Please.
Click to expand...

Bears. They are even carried when bow hunting for that reason. You feel free to try and dress and pack out an elk/deer at sundown and we'll come back to id your body the next morning.
 
#115
#115
lawgator1 said:
If you safely and responsibly store it to so as to prevent it from being stolen, then there is nothing to worry about.
Click to expand...

so again it's the fault of the legal owner and not the criminal? You're absolutely hopeless
 
#116
#116
lawgator1 said:
You are talking, much like VolsNskinsFan, about people who use the gun they PERSONALLY stole. That ignores the HUGE percentage of guns stolen at the outset, and then bought, one criminal to another.

Please expain this. As far as I can tell what this is saying is that a very small percentage of guns ever make it into circulation by being stolen. Illicit perhaps (straw puchase, etc), but not by theft. You also seem terribly ignorant of some of the laws. I can literally place a for sale add for a pistol in the local Bargain Mart and legally sell the gun in a parking lot. You DO know that, right?

Moreover, these FFLs discussed in your article as a major source? All that would prove is that the people getting those licenses ought to have to be heavily insured. The gretaer the volume of guns they put into the stream of illicit commerce, the more accountable they should be held.

Being actually licensed to receive and sell guns commercially it's fair to hold them criminally accountable for certain. Harshly so. I'm still awfully recalcitrant to play your "pass on the blame" bit.

This is not saying you can't own a gun. This is saying that, if you do, you have a big incentive to keep it under effective control. And if you don't, and it is predictably stolen, and then predictably ends up injuring someone, you (and not me and our fellow taxpayers) have to pay for the consequences of your own negligence.
Click to expand...

Again, your stance absolutely reeks of liability for the victim. I understand the argument you are trying to make. I understand that you appear to have good intentions in making this argument. I will NEVER condone the idea that the victim of a crime is subsequently responsible for the use of stolen items unless the circumstances were negligent in the extreme.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#117
#117
lawgator1 said:
The law on what constiututes negligent storage would be debated. I have my own ideas about that, with which you might disagree. But likely each state would enact its own statutes describing the requirements for non-negligent storage, and some would leave it to traditional tort principles, with each side in a case arguing about what is, and is not, the correct standard of care.

Using the automobile insurance example again, that question is asked and answered everyday across this country.



Example: I personally think having a gun stored in a car is per se negligent. That is, if you have a gun and keep it in your car and it is stolen, then you are automatically deemed at fault for any harm caused by the gun.

Result? No one stores guns in their car anymore. What's wrong with that?
Click to expand...

I agree about negligent storage in a public setting, however it is unreasonable to restrict gun owners on how they store their firearms on private property.
 
#118
#118
It is not a crime to own a gun. It is not a crime to store a gun in any manner you see fit. It is a crime to steal a gun. It is a crime to shoot another person.
 
#119
#119
utvolpj said:
I hunted with lots of guys that carry it for protection when hunting out west. My dad hates handguns and that is the only reason he owns one. Please spare me any post that tries to show you understand anything about firearms
Click to expand...

I have a buddy in Alaska that absolutely will not go hunting without a sidearm, he had a close call with a brown bear while filling a feed barrel. I personally do not, but I know a few guys that do.
 
#120
#120
utvolpj said:
Please spare me any post that tries to show you understand anything about firearms
Click to expand...

I don't mind people that don't know anything about firearms. There's lots of them. It's pretty irksome to have someone that clearly has an extremely limited knowledge of firearms carry on as though they do.

I can only hope he's constantly barraged by laymen that know more about the law than he does.
 
#121
#121
bleedorange1983 said:
I have a buddy in Alaska that absolutely will not go hunting without a sidearm, he had a close call with a brown bear while filling a feed barrel. I personally do not, but I know a few guys that do.
Click to expand...

I really don't know anyone that doesn't out there. I don't when I hunt in the east but out west I always did
 
#123
#123
Marine | New York Gun Law | Prison Sentence | The Daily Caller

Ryan Jerome was enjoying his first trip to New York City on business when the former Marine Corps gunner walked up to a security officer at the Empire State Building and asked where he should check his gun.

That was when Jerome’s nightmare began. The security officer called police and Jerome spent the next two days in jail.

The 28-year-old with no criminal history now faces a mandatory minimum sentence of three and a half years in prison. If convicted, his sentence could be as high as fifteen years.

Jerome has a valid concealed carry permit in Indiana and visited New York believing that it was legal to bring his firearm. He was traveling with $15,000 worth of jewelry that he planned to sell.

The online gun-law information Jerome read was inaccurate......
Click to expand...
 
#125
#125
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top