[Poll] Gun control - How much?

[Jamzmania]

That is secure. It takes longer to get to your safe, open it, and get the gun out, by then you would be dead. He is securing it properly.

Leaving said gun unsecured whilst going on holiday for a week, which is what we were actually discussing

Either way, throwing people in jail for having their property stolen is, quite frankly, wrong and a slippery slope.

[Big Jim P]

Either way, throwing people in jail for having their property stolen is, quite frankly, wrong and a slippery slope.

Wrong, stupid, and no different for trying to hold the manufacturer liable for the criminal misuse of the gun. Which is illegal.

[Dooom35796821595]

Either way, throwing people in jail for having their property stolen is, quite frankly, wrong and a slippery slope.

Wrong, stupid, and no different for trying to hold the manufacturer liable for the criminal misuse of the gun. Which is illegal.

Yeah, because Americans not only have the right to firearms but also the right to leave them unattended on their front lawn.

[Grinning Dragon]

Either way, throwing people in jail for having their property stolen is, quite frankly, wrong and a slippery slope.

I got to thinking. If a police officer or even a federal agent leaves his weapon behind say, after using the head, and someone stumbles upon it and uses it in the commission of a crime or kills someone, are those same people who advocate the criminal prosecution for us lowly serfs, going to hold those with a badge to the same standard?

[Salandriagado]

Either way, throwing people in jail for having their property stolen is, quite frankly, wrong and a slippery slope.

I got to thinking. If a police officer or even a federal agent leaves his weapon behind say, after using the head, and someone stumbles upon it and uses it in the commission of a crime or kills someone, are those same people who advocate the criminal prosecution for us lowly serfs, going to hold those with a badge to the same standard?

Yes, absolutely.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I got to thinking. If a police officer or even a federal agent leaves his weapon behind say, after using the head, and someone stumbles upon it and uses it in the commission of a crime or kills someone, are those same people who advocate the criminal prosecution for us lowly serfs, going to hold those with a badge to the same standard?

Yes, absolutely.

I'm still not seeing how it's a good idea.

[Salandriagado]

Yes, absolutely.

I'm still not seeing how it's a good idea.

Discourages people being shitting stupid and leaving guns unsecured, thereby avoiding those guns getting into the hands of criminals.

[Jamzmania]

I'm still not seeing how it's a good idea.

Discourages people being shitting stupid and leaving guns unsecured, thereby avoiding those guns getting into the hands of criminals.

Do we arrest people who have their TV stolen and it being used to fund the black market and drug industry? How about people whose cars are stolen and later kill or injure someone? How about people who were mugged--do we arrest them for not taking all proper precautions to avoid the mugging and/or defend themselves? That money probably went on to fund the drug industry, after all, which kills millions worldwide. Where do you stop?

EDIT: I'd also like to point out that all it does is discourage people from reporting a theft.

[Republic of Canador]

It's not the guns that are the problem; it's the people using them to shoot up their neighbors house. The U.S. Seems to have a genuine lack of care and respect for their fellow citizens. While the Swiss have one of the lowest crime rates in the world (and one of the highest guns per capita ratio), they are responsible with their weapons.

[Warpspace]

If you want to properly tackle gun control- you focus on pistols and that's it. Pistols are the easiest weapons to use in crime (you can carry them without having to wear a trench coat like in the Godfather or bring an MP5K Suitcase) and can be hidden by any person in any location lacking a metal detector. Rifles and shotguns meanwhile are exclusively going to be brought to bear during a legitimate gang-war street firefight or cartels, otherwise nobody is breaking into your home toting an AR-15 to take your TV.

Now I'm not too certain of where to stand on a ban of automatic rifles. In terms of defense they aren't really needed- almost all firefights are going to be conducted in semiautomatic to conserve ammunition and increase accuracy unless you panic. But there is the sport aspect, as many American families love to go down to the range to empty magazines for an AKM or AR-15.

However, for all gun owners there should definitely be checks into their mental health and revoking their right to bear arms until any mental illness improves.

[Sevvania]

Discourages people being shitting stupid and leaving guns unsecured, thereby avoiding those guns getting into the hands of criminals.

Do we arrest people who have their TV stolen and it being used to fund the black market and drug industry? That money probably went on to fund the drug industry, after all, which kills millions worldwide.

That scenario is a pretty slippery slope. A stolen TV that might have been used to fund a drug dealer that may have indirectly led to somebody dying doesn't seem comparable to a stolen gun being used in a homicide.

Whether gun owners should be held legally responsible for not reporting stolen firearms I'm not entirely sure. Safe storage would probably be a good practice for everyone to get into, though.

[Paddy O Fernature]

I'm still not seeing how it's a good idea.

Discourages people being shitting stupid and leaving guns unsecured, thereby avoiding those guns getting into the hands of criminals.

So, blame the victims instead of the criminals eh?

Sounds absolutely delightful.

[Sevvania]

Discourages people being shitting stupid and leaving guns unsecured, thereby avoiding those guns getting into the hands of criminals.

So, blame the victims instead of the criminals eh?

Sounds absolutely delightful.

There is a line between innocent victim and criminally negligent. Somebody jokingly mentioned leaving guns unattended on their front lawn. That's probably not something that happens often, but if it did, and said guns happened to be stolen, the owner should be held responsible because that's stupid and negligent.

But that's on one extreme end of the spectrum. The other end is securing the gun in a safe that's bolted into the floor any time you leave the room. The line between "victim-blaming" and "criminal negligence" is somewhere between those two points, but being the victim of theft shouldn't be a viable excuse across the entirety of the spectrum.

[North Calaveras]

Discourages people being shitting stupid and leaving guns unsecured, thereby avoiding those guns getting into the hands of criminals.

So, blame the victims instead of the criminals eh?

Sounds absolutely delightful.

apparently if i drive drunk in someone elses car and kill someone they should be at fault not me.

[Big Jim P]

Discourages people being shitting stupid and leaving guns unsecured, thereby avoiding those guns getting into the hands of criminals.

So, blame the victims instead of the criminals eh?

Sounds absolutely delightful.

No one ever said gun control proposals had to make sense.

[North Calaveras]

So, blame the victims instead of the criminals eh?

Sounds absolutely delightful.

No one ever said gun control proposals had to make sense.

they almost never do.

[Sevvania]

apparently if i drive drunk in someone elses car and kill someone they should be at fault not me.

I don't think anyone has suggested "only punish the owner and let the triggerman get off scot-free". Nobody is advocating that murderers be given a free pass just for using a stolen gun. Only that negligence should be a punishable offense. What could be considered "negligence" is up for debate.

[North Calaveras]

apparently if i drive drunk in someone elses car and kill someone they should be at fault not me.

I don't think anyone has suggested "only punish the owner and let the triggerman get off scot-free".

point is, the owner shouldn't get in trouble in the first place since hes not the one committing a crime!

if I steal your hammer and bash my neighbors head in, should you be at fault for leaving your hammer out?

[Omega America II]

I don't think anyone has suggested "only punish the owner and let the triggerman get off scot-free".

point is, the owner shouldn't get in trouble in the first place since hes not the one committing a crime!

if I steal your hammer and bash my neighbors head in, should you be at fault for leaving your hammer out?

Nope, it shouldn't be your fault.

[Sevvania]

I don't think anyone has suggested "only punish the owner and let the triggerman get off scot-free".

point is, the owner shouldn't get in trouble in the first place since hes not the one committing a crime!

if I steal your hammer and bash my neighbors head in, should you be at fault for leaving your hammer out?

We're not talking about hammers here. If I were to leave a loaded rifle at the edge of my yard, and the neighbor's kid were to come by, pick it up, and shoot his friend in the face, then I should go to jail, because that outcome would have been the direct result of utter neglect and gross disregard for safety on my part.

[North Calaveras]

point is, the owner shouldn't get in trouble in the first place since hes not the one committing a crime!

if I steal your hammer and bash my neighbors head in, should you be at fault for leaving your hammer out?

We're not talking about hammers here. If I were to leave a loaded rifle at the edge of my yard, and the neighbor's kid were to pick it up and shoot his friend in the face, then I should go to jail, because that outcome would have been the direct result of utter neglect and gross disregard for safety on my part.

A child also isn't an adult and dosn't know better, so yes negligence should be in place on that aspect

HOWEVER

an ADULT taking your firearm is ENTIRELY different.

[Omega America II]

point is, the owner shouldn't get in trouble in the first place since hes not the one committing a crime!

if I steal your hammer and bash my neighbors head in, should you be at fault for leaving your hammer out?

We're not talking about hammers here. If I were to leave a loaded rifle at the edge of my yard, and the neighbor's kid were to pick it up and shoot his friend in the face, then I should go to jail, because that outcome would have been the direct result of utter neglect and gross disregard for safety on my part.

Ok, it would make sense if it was on the edge of your yard, but if it was in your house, you shouldn't be held responsible.

[The Heart of Hypatia]

If I were American, which I am not, I would likely have voted for option 2. I understand many of the arguments behind their second amendment and I respect that.

However, I am British. We currently use option 4 for the most part and it works, so I voted for option 4. It probably wouldn't work in America, but it works for us.

[Omega America II]

If I were American, which I am not, I would likely have voted for option 2. I understand many of the arguments behind their second amendment and I respect that.

However, I am British. We currently use option 4 for the most part and it works, so I voted for option 4. It probably wouldn't work in America, but it works for us.

I understand, although I have to defintly agree with option 2, citizens should be able to own firearms as well.

[Sevvania]

We're not talking about hammers here. If I were to leave a loaded rifle at the edge of my yard, and the neighbor's kid were to pick it up and shoot his friend in the face, then I should go to jail, because that outcome would have been the direct result of utter neglect and gross disregard for safety on my part.

Ok, it would make sense if it was on the edge of your yard, but if it was in your house, you shouldn't be held responsible.

And that's what I'm saying. There are scenarios which should clearly be considered criminal negligence. And there are scenarios that shouldn't be considered negligence, that the owner shouldn't be faulted for. Where to draw the line between negligence and victimization is up for debate, but "The owner should be 100% faultless every time no matter what" is a silly mindset.