Guns Rights Zealots--Shoot Down this Idea

[blackbird]

If guns fall into the wrong hands, then someone is responsible for that happening. If there are heavy financial penalties for gun sellers when the source of a gun is traced, or gun owners are held responsible when their guns are used in committing a crime, the rate of shooting deaths will plummet.

I suppose this lame plea will be the avenue that the leftest politicians and sorry lame media will take in addition to them cryin' about even MORE gun control-----to the point where I can own a gun but that if it isn't locked up in a child proof safe and is stolen from my home and used in a crime---I, as the guns owner---am a accomplice and accesory to the crime!!

Now I have heard everything!!!

 

[Don]

Sales of guns go up in the wake of mass shootings because people are stupid and believe every rumor that comes down the pike. You would think, after years of rumors about taking your guns away never coming to pass, that people would know better. It's been the best marketing tool gun manufacturers and retailers have ever used.

Right wingers are always talking about personal responsibility for behavior, though they do not seem to be interested in applying that to gun ownership or gun sales. If guns fall into the wrong hands, then someone is responsible for that happening. If there are heavy financial penalties for gun sellers when the source of a gun is traced, or gun owners are held responsible when their guns are used in committing a crime, the rate of shooting deaths will plummet.

Jack--just went through this with InTheLight. What you're saying is, a gun dealer does his/her part; they run the background check, they enforce the waiting period in those states that require it, they do all the paperwork--and the person they just sold the gun to, after following all the legal process steps, uses the weapon for a crime. How do you justify that the gun dealer still has some complicity in the crime? Or the weapon is stolen from the person who bought it following the legal process--do we now hold the gun owner AND the gun dealer complicit in the crime?

The answer is NOT the availability of the weapon; the answer is enforcing the rules/laws about using the weapons. Make the penalty so severe no one will want to use them for illegal purposes.

 

[Revmitchell]

That is right the threat to over regulate gun ownership has been looming for years. The fact that it hasn't happened is not evidence that no one, to include obama, wants to do it. It is evidence that the threat has been beaten back each and every time. What is "stupid" are those who pretend otherwise.

 

[Jack Matthews]

There is no such thing as "over-regulating" gun ownership. If you believe that, you do not understand the second amendment.

Virtually every post since I suggested that gun manufacturers and gun owners should be responsible for their guns has proved the point that I made, which is that, when it comes to gun ownership, personal accountability and responsibility does not apply. It applies to everyone else and everything else, but not them.

It is the same thing as holding a bar or cocktail lounge responsible for allowing one of their customers to get drunk and get behind the wheel of a car. Or that a woman who runs risks and winds up pregnant should carry the baby to term. Be responsible. If you want to own a gun, make sure it is used legally, otherwise, pay the price. The rest of us should not have to, nor should children in their school.

 

[mont974x4]

No one has denied personal responsibility or accountability. You're leveling false accusations at people and it's not right, even it is expected from people who favor more gun control. Your whole argument is based on misleading information.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

It comes from thinking with the heart, and not the head.

That, and the mindset that everyone who disagrees is "stupid". LOL.

And personal responsibility now has a chain of command.

WOW.

 

[Mexdeaf]

I hope that the police always arrive in time when they are needed for Jack and ITL.

For those of us who live where the response time is anywhere from 15-45 minutes, self-protection is our right and RESPONSIBILITY. Especially here in the South Texas badlands.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Or just about anywhere in Montana.

 

[InTheLight]

Virtually every post since I suggested that gun manufacturers and gun owners should be responsible for their guns has proved the point that I made, which is that, when it comes to gun ownership, personal accountability and responsibility does not apply. It applies to everyone else and everything else, but not them.

It is the same thing as holding a bar or cocktail lounge responsible for allowing one of their customers to get drunk and get behind the wheel of a car. Or that a woman who runs risks and winds up pregnant should carry the baby to term. Be responsible. If you want to own a gun, make sure it is used legally, otherwise, pay the price. The rest of us should not have to, nor should children in their school.

How would you hold gun manufacturers responsible for crimes committed with guns? That's so far removed from their responsibility it's ludicrous.

Your analogies with the bar owner and pregnant woman fails. With the customer at the bar it is clear what overindulging in alcohol will do to a person. The bar owner knows this. The gun dealer does not know what a customer is going to do with a gun. Since the 2nd amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, the default attitude of the gun dealer should be that the customer will be responsible with it.The only way your analogy would work is if the gun dealer was selling a gun to a known felon. As to the woman, she didn't exercise personal responsibility and therefore got pregnant. Once pregnant, yes, she is responsible for the baby.

 

[InTheLight]

I hope that the police always arrive in time when they are needed for Jack and ITL.

For those of us who live where the response time is anywhere from 15-45 minutes, self-protection is our right and RESPONSIBILITY. Especially here in the South Texas badlands.

I'm not denying you the right to self-protection. I'm trying to find sensible ways to decrease things like Newtown massacres. All I'm saying is lock up your guns if you're not using them, do not anticipate using them, or are leaving them unattended.

If you want to sleep with a loaded gun under your pillow, have at it.

 

[mont974x4]

We already have those kinds of laws. Had the shooter lived then those charges would have been filed.

 

[Mexdeaf]

I'm not denying you the right to self-protection. I'm trying to find sensible ways to decrease things like Newtown massacres. All I'm saying is lock up your guns if you're not using them, do not anticipate using them, or are leaving them unattended.

If you want to sleep with a loaded gun under your pillow, have at it.

The sensible way to do what you ask is to have armed protection in the so-called "gun-free" zones. Anything else is just punishing the innocent.

Let's face it, when we commit our children to public education we commit them to their safety and care for the hours they are there. If they do not provide that safety then that is not the fault of legal, law-abiding gun owners.

I suppose you were speaking somewhat TIC, but only an idiot sleeps with a gun under their pillow. Mine is close at hand, though.

 

[Revmitchell]

There is no such thing as "over-regulating" gun ownership. If you believe that, you do not understand the second amendment.

Good grief it is clear you do not.

Virtually every post since I suggested that gun manufacturers and gun owners should be responsible for their guns has proved the point that I made, which is that, when it comes to gun ownership, personal accountability and responsibility does not apply. It applies to everyone else and everything else, but not them.

Only in your mind.

It is the same thing as holding a bar or cocktail lounge responsible for allowing one of their customers to get drunk and get behind the wheel of a car. Or that a woman who runs risks and winds up pregnant should carry the baby to term. Be responsible. If you want to own a gun, make sure it is used legally, otherwise, pay the price. The rest of us should not have to, nor should children in their school.

Its not the same thing.

 

[Don]

Jack, for your bar analogy to work, then the bartender would also be liable for whenever a woman gets drunk, loses her inhibitions, and as a result, gets pregnant. I mean, let's face it: if the bartender hadn't sold her just one more drink, she might not have ended up saying yes. So technically, the bar and bartender should be contributing to the child support.

It's all about personal responsibility. Lanza's mother didn't give him a gun; he took hers, and killed her with it. Then he took more of hers; whether they had trigger locks or were in a gun safe, I don't know--but it doesn't matter, because they belonged to his mother, and he probably knew where the key was. Then he used his mother's weapons to murder others.

Jack, the state of Illinois requires that you possess a Firearms Owner ID in order to buy or have weapons and ammunition. Guess what? There were 14 shootings in Chicago over Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. I don't know how many of those shooters had their FOIDs, but it didn't stop them, now did it?

The ONLY thing you can do is severely punish improper use of weapons. Educate, educate, educate. Make it so that people are ingrained that improper weapons is not a consideration because the crime isn't worth the punishment.

 

[Revmitchell]

Liberals are always wanting to blame someone else for everything. Personal responsibility goes right out the door with them'

 

[just-want-peace]

Liberals are always wanting to blame someone else for everything. Personal responsibility goes right out the door with them'

Now this is one of the most glaring distinctions between libs & conservatives; certainly not the only one, but one of the most obvious!