Another irresponsible gun owner

This is a discussion on Another irresponsible gun owner within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; At what magical age does an "appropriate" amount of maturity and responsibility settle into a young man that society can suddenly trust him with a ...

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 69 of 69

Thread: Another irresponsible gun owner

  1. #61
    Senior Member Array wjh2657's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lafayette, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,166
    At what magical age does an "appropriate" amount of maturity and responsibility settle into a young man that society can suddenly trust him with a firearm? That's an important question. When you pick an age that you can support restricting the rights of all citizens in society, you support the Brady Campaign in its efforts to answer the question, for everyone, as never.



    In other words, you support the Brady Campaign in passing gun control laws in Oregon.[/QUOTE]

    As I understand it , anybody who believes guns are for self defense and not for mayhem and general carnage in the schools and in public is a member of the Brady Campaign. Anybody who believes that guns could be dangerous in the wrong hands and that safety and common sense should prevail when dealing with children is a liberal, commie, pinko unAmerican traitor?

    I am a responsible adult and a combat veteran who fought for our rights, not just running my mouth about them. I am a member of the NRA and a responsible father and grandfather. I base my judgement on decades of owning guns and working with children on a daily basis.

    I do not subscribe that the Second Amendment gave us the right to be irresponsible in how we use and care for our weapons. It gave us the right to have them, not to use them without due regard for public safety. My last comments in this topic.
    Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #62
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Here is a specific list of gun control issues that the Brady Campaign advocates in its efforts to pass gun control in Oregon that I linked to earlier. For the same reasons you support them on Child Access Prevention laws, surely you'll support them in their efforts to pass many of these other laws in Oregon and other states.

    Oregon Gun Laws
    Anti-Trafficking
    Is there a one-handgun-per-month limit on gun sales? No

    No state restrictions on gun-trafficking such as a limit on the number of handguns that can be purchased at one time. Gun traffickers can easily buy large quantities of handguns at gun stores and resell them on the street to criminals.
    Assault Weapons

    Are there limitations on assault weapons and magazines? No
    Oregon - No state restriction on the sale or possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons. Assault weapons are as easy to buy as hunting rifles. Congress and President Bush allowed the federal assault weapons ban to sunset in 2004. See also: Large Capacity Ammunition Magazines
    Ballistic Fingerprinting

    Must guns be ballistic fingerprinted prior to sale? No

    No state requirement that gun dealers or manufacturers provide police with sample bullets/cartridges or digital images of bullets/cartridges prior to the sale of a handgun, ballistic fingerprinting, which would assist police in tracing bullets at crime scenes to the guns that fired them.
    CCW Limits

    May police limit carrying concealed handguns? No

    State law forces police chiefs and state sheriffs to give concealed carry permits (CCW) to anyone who can buy a handgun, allowing them to carry loaded, concealed handguns in public (known as shall issue). Some safety training in the legal or safe use of weapons is required to obtain the CCW permit.

    Child Access Prevention - CAP
    Are gun owners held accountable for leaving guns accessible to kids? No


    No state requirement that gun owners take responsible steps to prevent children from gaining easy access to their firearms. Gun owners are not held accountable for leaving loaded guns around kids, even if a young child shoots themselves or someone else with a gun left in plain sight.


    Child-Safety Locks
    Must locking devices be sold with guns? No

    No state requirement that guns be sold with child-safety locks that could prevent a tragic accident. Child-safety locks cost as little as $10 and could save lives if sold with firearms.


    Childproof Handguns
    Are only authorized users able to operate handguns? No
    Oregon - There is no state law mandating that all new handguns be sold with 'personalized' handgun technology that would only allow the authorized user to operate the firearm. Childproof handguns play an important role in helping to prevent unintentional shootings among children and to deter suicides among minors.


    Gun Dealer Regulations
    Must gun dealers adhere to state licensing and/or oversight systems? Partial

    Oregon - No state laws exist requiring firearm dealers obtain a state license to sell firearms. But state law mandates all firearm dealers to record and retain all sales records on premises. The dealer is required to report those sales records to the state and the state must retain those records in a database. Law enforcement officials are permitted to conduct random inspections to compare a dealer's inventory with the dealer's sales records in order to identify any off-the-books transactions or other discrepancies.

    Gun Manufacturer Accountability
    Do cities have authority to hold gun makers legally liable? Yes


    State law allows cities and local governments to take legal action to hold gun manufacturers accountable if they act irresponsibly in the way they design, market or distribute weapons. Gun manufacturers can be held legally accountable, just like the makers of every other product.

    Gun Show Checks
    Are background checks required at gun shows? Yes


    State law requires people buying guns at gun shows to undergo the same Brady criminal background check as is required for sales that occur at federally-licensed gun stores. The law was enacted as a citizen ballot initiative in 2000 following the Columbine school massacre.

    Guns at Work
    Are businesses forced to allow guns in the workplace? No
    Oregon - There is no state law forcing employers or businesses to allow guns on their privately held property.


    Guns on College Campuses
    Are colleges/universities forced to allow guns on campus? No

    Oregon - There is no state law forcing colleges/universities to allow guns on campus.


    High Capacity Magazines
    High Capacity Magazines No

    Oregon - There is no state law restricting the sale or possession of large capacity ammunition magazines that can fire 30, 50 or even 75 rounds without reloading. Ammunition magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds of ammunition are considered large capacity magazines. These types of ammunition magazines are available for any firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine, including assault weapons and semi-automatic handguns.

    Juvenile Sale
    Is it illegal to sell guns to kids? No

    State law does not restrict selling handguns to juveniles under the age of 21 by unlicensed sellers. Under federal law, only federally licensed dealers are prohibited from selling or delivering handguns or ammunition for handguns to any person under the age of 21. A strong state law is needed to stop unlicensed persons from selling handguns to those under the age of 21.


    License or Permit to Purchase
    Is a license/permit required to buy handguns? No

    No state requirement that handgun buyers obtain a handgun license or undergo any type of safety training prior to buying a handgun.


    Local Gun Laws - Preemption
    May cities enact laws stronger than the state's? No


    State law generally restricts local city or county governments from enacting local gun laws, even though the state has failed to pass many responsible state-wide laws. Local governments are allowed to enact local laws regulating sales of guns in public buildings and sales of used guns. This preemption of local government authority makes it difficult for cities to enact sensible gun laws to make their citizens safer.

    Microstamping
    Must new handguns be sold with microstamping technology? No

    Oregon - There is no state law requiring new semi-automatic handguns be fitted with microstamping technology, which would engrave on each fired bullet casing microscopic identifying markings that are specific to that firearm alone. This technology would provide law enforcement with another investigative tool to better solve gun crimes and apprehend armed criminals.

    Record-Keeping
    May police maintain gun sale records? Partial

    State law authorizes law enforcement to keep a record of every gun sold by gun dealers and non-licensed sellers at gun shows for 5 years, but the state does not maintain any record on "private" sales between individuals. The firearm sale records of gun dealers are maintained by law enforcement for use in gun tracing and related criminal investigations. But the state does not automatically compare past gun sale records with recent criminal activity to identify and disarm felons and others who bought guns legally, but later committed a crime or otherwise became ineligible to keep possession of their firearms.

    Registration
    Are all guns registered with law enforcement? No


    No state requirement that gun owners register their firearms. Police do not know how many guns are in the state or where they are. The lack of registration data makes it more difficult for police to trace guns used in crime, identify illegal gun traffickers or hold gun owners accountable for their weapons. There is no state system to automatically identify and disarm felons and other prohibited people who bought guns legally in the past, but later committed a crime or otherwise became ineligible to keep possession of their firearms.


    Report Lost/Stolen Guns
    Are firearm owners required to report all lost or stolen guns to law enforcement? No

    Oregon - State law does not require firearm owners to report lost or stolen firearms to law enforcement. This requirement would help to keep illegal guns off the streets by removing the excuse used by gun traffickers that "lose" their firearms.


    Safety Standards
    Are there consumer safety standards on guns? No

    No state requirement that handguns meet any basic safety standards. No requirement that guns be sold with a child-safety lock or a built-in personalized lock to prevent unauthorized use. No requirement that handguns have loaded-chamber indicators or magazine safety disconnects that could prevent unintentional shootings. The state Attorney General is authorized to independently establish handgun safety standards, but has not done so.


    Saturday Night Specials
    Are there limitations on 'junk' handguns? No


    No state restriction on the sale of Saturday night specials or "junk" handguns. No requirement that handguns meet any safety tests such as a drop-safety test or a firing-performance test. No restriction on the sale of snub-nosed handguns that are very small and easy to conceal.

    Shoot First
    Is deadly force allowed to be a first resort in public? No

    Oregon - The state does not allow the use of deadly force as a first resort in public.

    Universal Background Checks
    Are background checks required on every firearm transaction? No

    Oregon - No state requirement that criminal background checks be done on all firearm sales. People buying firearms at gun shows, swap meets, or through newspaper or internet advertisements are not subject to a background check. Criminal background checks are only required if the buyer goes to a federally-licensed gun store - all other sales are not subject to the background check.

    Waiting Period
    Is there a waiting period on gun sales? No


    No state requirement that there be a waiting period for gun sales beyond the "instant check" in federal law. Police are not given any additional time to run a criminal background check to make sure the gun buyer is not prohibited from acquiring firearms. There is no "cooling off" period to help prevent crimes of passion.

  4. #63
    Sponsor
    Array Chris Dawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Central FL
    Posts
    389
    Quote Originally Posted by TX-JB View Post
    That would mean someone would have to be responsible for their own actions....That doesn't happen anymore in this country...it's always someone elses' fault...
    +++1

    There is what is right and wrong and what is legal. The law is what it is... Here is FL it is the gun owners responsibility to secure his/her firearm from a child's prying hands. (While 15 isn't an infant it isn't an adult either).

    Speaking from memory here (that is scary in itself) here in FL it is not a requirement to lock up the gun either. It would be up to the jury to determine if it was secured or not.


    <EDIT> I always seem to show up late for the party!
    Last edited by Chris Dawg; November 20th, 2009 at 12:47 PM. Reason: <EDIT> I always seem to show up late for the party!

  5. #64
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by crf3973 View Post
    That office will is also responsible for figuring out whether the gun owner, who is also the homeowner, faces any criminal liability.

    Springfield Teen Intentionally Shoots Friend In Face | KEZI
    although the article reads that...

    "the office is responsible for figuring out whether the gun owner, who is also the homeowner, faces any criminal liability"...

    it does not state that the gun owner would be charged criminally in the shooting...the charges may have to do with the availability of the loaded firearm as opposed to holding the owner responsible for the actual shooting...i dont believe anyone here ever said the owner was responsible for the shooting or the actions of the youth that shot the other youth...only that the owner may have been responsible for the availability of the firearm...

    Quote Originally Posted by dldeuce View Post
    What has struck me about this story and the discussion is that I think many gun owners and society in general have acquiesced to a Brady Campaign gun control mentality that didn't exist like just fifteen years ago. We are talking about a 15 year old young man here who picked up a loaded gun, pointed it at his friends face, and pulled the trigger. This isn't a four year old or ten year old child. We're talking about a fifteen year old young man.

    Just like the Brady Campaign would, we have several posters trying to assign a criminal responsibility to the gun owner even when no such criminal law exists in that state. Here on a forum that exists to advocate gun rights, we have posters essentially advocating a Brady Campaign position that Oregon should pass child access prevention laws because if it's not illegal now, it should be.
    several posters were/are not trying to assign criminal responsibility to the gun owner even though no such criminal law exists in the state...unfortunately their/our ignorance to the fact that there was no law in the state allowed us to point out that (in the event there was such a law in the state...as so many have) he could face charges for such...

    and much longer than 15 years ago my father would have beaten me to within an inch of my life for allowing an untrained minor access to one of my firearms...and he was one of the biggest gun rights advocates i have ever known...

    not only does this site advocate gun rights...it also advocates the responsible use, care and precautions that go along with gun ownership and use...

    the very things that prevent many of the laws that we dont like from being passed...

    bringing these things to light and discussing them in a public forum does not indicate any support of the brady campaign but you feel it necessary to mention it because it divides us into a seperate and opposing gun rights group...which plays more into the brady campaign methodology than the statements we made in our own ignorance...

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta8045 View Post
    careful...very sheep-like...getting it yet?

    Quote Originally Posted by dldeuce View Post
    I disagree. The reason is based upon a successful political campaign to eliminate firearms from our society altogether. In Texas, there was no reason minors couldn't be allowed to possess guns alone until 1995, when apparently as a concession to passing CHL laws, the Brady Campaign was successful in getting a child access protection law passed. I think these laws are having the intended and well planned chilling effect on owning and possessing firearms. I think what we're seeing now is a generational effect of incremental gun control when apparent gun owners are so willing to support gun control laws.

    When I was 12, I had my own .22 rifle and .20 gauge shotgun. I hunted unsupervised with my brother and cousins, with my grandfather's 870 .12 gauge shotgun. I had my own deer rifle, and it wasn't uncommon to be left alone when deer hunting with my father. I had constant and ready access to loaded and unloaded firearms and ammunition for as long as I can remember. This was common and normal even growing up in the suburbs of Houston. It wasn't illegal or immoral until the Brady Campaign sought to end our rights to own firearms altogether.

    t what magical age does an "appropriate" amount of maturity and responsibility settle into a young man that society can suddenly trust him with a firearm? That's an important question. When you pick an age that you can support restricting the rights of all citizens in society, you support the Brady Campaign in its efforts to answer the question, for everyone, as never.

    In other words, you support the Brady Campaign in passing gun control laws in Oregon.
    and what did the brady campaign use for ammunition to pass htose laws regarding minors and guns?...situations like the topic of this thread?...

    i believe...but may be mistaken...that the majority of us were probably brought up around firearms, including the proper use, care and most importantly safety that is required when handling them...thats is most likely where our love for them came from...i have owned and fired guns since i was able to hold them and was always properly supervised as a youth....those habits are ingrained in me...

    the problem is many of us take that upbringing for granted and think it applies to everyone by some sort of osmosis...the failed thinking is just that...there are a great number of children who did not have the benefit of any informal or formal training or even exposure to firearms or the proper care, use or safety precautuions...their only exposure is the fantasy world of television and movies...point, shoot, hero...exposure to a firearm...even as an adult can end in less than desireable results because of their inability to think their way through what they are holding in their hands...responsible or not....just look around you at work...how many people have enough common sense to fight their way through the day let alone make decisions with any clarity or forethought?...a firearm in the hands of a person who has no business with one regardless of intent can be a serious and life threatening problem...multiply that with testoerone laden teen years and you have the makings of a newspaper article and a great deal of pain for families and friends...

    as gun owners i believe it is our responsibility to lessen the likelyhood of these things from happening...if it means a little inconvenience like not "forgetting" to lock the safe or making sure our firearms are secure (not necessarily fort knox locked up but secure) from curious hands then so be it....i dont see that as a threat to our rights...i see it as preservation of them...

    when you allow a minor with no firearm training access to your firearm (we do not know if the firearm was locked up, hidden or hwatever was used as excuses in this thread so far) you do more to support the brady campaign than i could ever do with my statements here...i am on your side...otherwise we're in bigger trouble than we think...

  6. #65
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Dawg View Post
    +++1

    There is what is right and wrong and what is legal. The law is what it is... Here is FL it is the gun owners responsibility to secure his/her firearm from a child's prying hands. (While 15 isn't an infant it isn't an adult either).

    Speaking from memory here (that is scary in itself) here in FL it is not a requirement to lock up the gun either. It would be up to the jury to determine if it was secured or not.
    In Texas, it's perfectly legal to leave loaded firearms readily accessible to children of any age. It only becomes illegal depending upon what this minor does with the gun after you leave. Oh, and if you leave the cartridges in a magazine or speed loader in close proximity to the gun, no apparent problem for you if the fifteen year old loads the gun first, points it at his friend's forhead, and pulls the trigger. Oh, and not if you live on a farm. It's perfectly legal for farmers to leave loaded firearms accessible to any child of any age. It was also perfectly legal and left entirely to the conscience of parents from 1836-1995. How's that for the moral authority behind these laws?

  7. #66
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Dawg View Post
    While 15 isn't an infant it isn't an adult either
    He is absolutely an adult. That's why he's apparently going to be tried as an adult for second-degree assault and unlawful possession of a firearm. Had the other young man died, it would be at least 2nd degree murder.

    Does anyone else but me see the immoral double standard? The state expects this young man to act like an adult and be held accountable as an adult. Yet it holds its citizens criminally responsible to treat this young man as an irresponsible child. Which is it?

  8. #67
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by dldeuce View Post
    In Texas, it's perfectly legal to leave loaded firearms readily accessible to children of any age. It only becomes illegal depending upon what this minor does with the gun after you leave. (!? similarities here?) Oh, and if you leave the cartridges in a magazine or speed loader in close proximity to the gun, no apparent problem for you if the fifteen year old loads the gun first, points it at his friend's forhead, and pulls the trigger. Oh, and not if you live on a farm. It's perfectly legal for farmers to leave loaded firearms accessible to any child of any age. It was also perfectly legal and left entirely to the conscience of parents from 1836-1995. How's that for the moral authority behind these laws?

    and kids didnt have to wear helmets on bicycles(and kids with brain damage were ok), child car seats werent required(its up to you whether you want your kid to survive an accident...its nobody elses business), lead paint was popular(and kids loved it), there were no building codes (of course nobody in your family would sue if you fell through a poorly supported floor...would they?..because you would know where to walk and not walk)...asbestos was a fantastic pipe insulator, building material and brake lining material(who cared if it took a life here and there?), workers werent paid for a days work(and didnt receive any benefits-heck kids worked for practically free and could last for hours before collapsing) and kids could be beaten by their parents (which really wasnt such a bad thing...was it?), you could take a slave(reference my previous comments...you might not appreciate how that sucked for them), a 12 year old made a great wife and had many years of baby making in her (handy on your farm and you only needed her parents approval...or you might be able to buy her if they were hard up), posses linched people they thought might be the guys who robbed the bank(hey...they looked like them), people who were thought to be dead were buried alive(but they eventually died), the powerful bullied or burned people off their land (which may not be much different from eminent domain but did include bloodshed at times...but by righteous gun owners with freedom)...

    where the he!! did all those damned laws come from?

    damn...those were the good old days...

  9. #68
    Distinguished Member Array razor02097's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,974
    The fact of the matter is that some states have different laws. One person here had to post 3 times that Oregon law doesn’t hold the gun owner responsible.

    Let be adults here. Posting that someone is too "white" is a racist comment. This has nothing to do with race, sex, or ethnical background.

    The discussion at hand is people's opinions not whether or not the law should be followed. Of course you should abide by the law.

    IMO the step brother should not be prosecuted as a criminal. Doesn’t mean he will and it doesn't mean he won't they said they where looking into it. We don't know the outcome of this case.

    You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. This is a free country. Things are different in different places. Get over it.
    There is something about firing 4,200 thirty millimeter rounds/min that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

  10. #69
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    the white comment was a reference to discrimination as example and was made by a white member of this board...as a reference it was not racial although it used a race for that reference because it is a well known reference for discrimination (sorry that wasnt clear with the supporting post)...i'm not sure but i dont believe the internet has a law against that...maybe someone can correct that for me...

    labeling someone who believes that a gun owner should be more responsible with his firearms and access to them as a supporter of the brady campaign could be considered is more discriminatory and in poorer taste in my opinion...thankfully we are entitled to our opinions...

    the posters did not have to mention 3 times that there was no law in the state in question regarding leaving guns out for minors to play with...we got it the first time...thats not really where the thread was going...yeah it was mentioned but responsibility was in question...what we didnt realize was that if a law doesnt exist then there is no responsibility in several posters opinions...including the law enforcement officers in the said state...which they are entitled to...

    and regarding getting over it...i am and have been over it...this is a discussion group and the discussion is healthy in my opinion...it is not personal and anyone who takes it that way may have to reevaluate why they are here...there were many good points made for both sides of the discussion and we can probably all learn from them...thought provoking conversation beats brainless internet games all day long...it wouldnt bother me if this went on for weeks...there is no solution...only learning for all of us...if it is not to the liking of some they have the option to not participate...thats freedom...

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Irresponsible move? you decide
    By GoBigOrange in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: July 31st, 2010, 06:45 PM
  2. had a run-in with a irresponsible cc permit holder the other night
    By blar in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: December 1st, 2009, 11:48 PM
  3. Was I being irresponsible?
    By SubNine in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: June 25th, 2009, 11:39 AM
  4. My Turn To Rant: Irresponsible Carriers
    By BigEFan in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: December 12th, 2007, 10:53 AM
  5. Handgun Owner - 1, BB Gun Owner - 0
    By CT-Mike in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 25th, 2007, 04:03 PM

Search tags for this page

crimes committed with illegal guns vs. legal guns

,

gun owner responsible for securing

,

gunsafe left unlocked killed

,

in ct., gun owners responsible when someone kills themself with your gun

Click on a term to search for related topics.