It's now been confirmed the gun that started the Kansas City Superbowl shooting was stolen

[Dadoalex]

Walgreens give man products when man steal/shoplift from Walgreens?

If walgreens fails to protect its products, yes.

You have heard of "Loss Management" have you not?
No?
Not surprised.

 

[jotathought]

If walgreens fails to protect its products, yes.

You have heard of "Loss Management" have you not?
No?
Not surprised.

Wouldn't that apply to a gun owner that had a thief steal his gun? Your message is not congruent. You're stating that stealing is giving.

 

[Moonglow]

But how silent the MSM has grown over this matter. Gee, I wonder why? No way to spin it to whip up hate against white people.

I would not use my own gun to shoot someone I would steal one.

 

[Dadoalex]

Wouldn't that apply to a gun owner that had a thief steal his gun? Your message is not congruent. You're stating that stealing is giving.

Park your car at WalMart.
Leave the doors unlocked and the windows down
Leave the keys in the ignition with the car running.

The thief's stealing it is clearly abetted by your failure to protect it.

Therefore, you, in effect, gave him the car.

 

[airplanemechanic]

------------------------------------------------------
The two posters above touch upon a major problem. Negligent, irresponsible gun owners. But there is a partial solution that could significantly mitigate it.
And I've read about it on this very venue, USMB.

And that is "Strict Liability".
Meaning, if you are the OOR (Owner-of-Record) and your gun is used to create harm then you, ipso facto, are on the hook for part of the liability.

And yes, that means even if it is stolen out from underneath the seat of your F-150 while you have a brew at Joe's Bar you still share in the liability. If you own the benefits of that gun, then you also own the harms.

With that approach our society will see fewer guns employed by criminals or into the hands of tragically killed children in the home. Because.......because of enhanced self-interest of the OOR. Now he knows to a much greater degree that with his right to own a firearm their is an enhanced responsibility. Accordingly, there will be increased security. Self-interest motivates such.

Ok, if the same law is passed for cars where if your car is stolen and used in a felony such as bank robbery, murder, vehicular homicide or even child abduction and molestation, YOU go to prison for bank robbery, murder, vehicular homicide or kidnapping and child molestation.

Fair enough?

 

[Chillicothe]

• I keep my firearms in a safe. If someone wanted to, they could haul it out of my house. ...... I'm liable?

• I would add the caveat that storing the firearms properly and safely is an affirmative defense.

Indeed, if one has a gun stolen from a safe or substantial locked cabinet and it is used in a crime.....the share of liability is significantly less* than the diqhead whose Glock17 was stolen from under the seat of his Jeep.

But still, even with the safe...if the gun is used to cause harm the OOR is not home free. There must be enhanced responsibility and accountability when an individual brings such a high-lethality tool into our society. Again, think poison. Think grenades. Think dynamite.
If you lose control of your high-lethality tool.....you bear some responsibility.
Period.

*but never zero. Ever. The gun is a responsibility.

if your car is stolen and used in a felony

We ain't talking about cars.
Cars are different than guns.
Anyone on this forum who has ever used a gun, anyone on this forum who has also used cars.....understands viscerally that one is not a substitute for the other.

Guns are different.
Period.

 

[Dadoalex]

Indeed, if one has a gun stolen from a safe or substantial locked cabinet and it is used in a crime.....the share of liability is significantly less* than the diqhead whose Glock17 was stolen from under the seat of his Jeep.

But still, even with the safe...if the gun is used to cause harm the OOR is not home free. There must be enhanced responsibility and accountability when an individual brings such a high-lethality tool into our society. Again, think poison. Think grenades. Think dynamite.
If you lose control of your high-lethality tool.....you bear some responsibility.
Period.

*but never zero. Ever. The gun is a responsibility.


We ain't talking about cars.
Cars are different than guns.
Anyone on this forum who has ever used a gun, anyone on this forum who has also used cars.....understands viscerally that one is not a substitute for the other.

Guns are different.
Period.

Actually, if you fail to secure your vehicle (attractive nuisance) you can be liable for damages caused if it is stolen.

 

[Rogue AI]

Didn't ask.
How many people are you responsible for killing because of your irresponsible gun storage?
Were those your guns in KC?
Is that why you're so defensive?

View attachment 905977

Funny how you folks place zero responsibility on the thieves. Instead you attack the victims of crimes. Typical liberal behavior.

 

[para bellum]

The cops have zero interest in property crimes. They just tell you to call your insurance company.

A few years back I had (among other things) 2 guns stolen, and substantial damage to my home in the break-in. (a big picture window, the back door, and one wall were either damaged or destroyed)

In addition to the guns, the thieves stole a tablet computer. Well, this tablet computer had an app that allowed me to track it over the internet. I thought great! We can catch these assholes!

I gave the tracking info to the cops, and went online to see if I could track them. Within a couple hours of the break-in, I had the thieves geolocated. Told the cops where they were. No response. 3 days, 3 different jurisdictions, I could not get one police dept to even go check it out.

I finally just locked the tablet remotely and gave up. No P.D. ever logged in and tried to locate the device.

 

[Dadoalex]

Funny how you folks place zero responsibility on the thieves. Instead you attack the victims of crimes. Typical liberal behavior.

Are the shooters not under arrest?
yes
Are the enablers who provided the guns under arrest?
No

How is this not clear even to a sack of Trump?

 

[Rogue AI]

Are the shooters not under arrest?
yes
Are the enablers who provided the guns under arrest?
No

How is this not clear even to a sack of Trump?

You attack law abiding gun owners, who are victims of crimes (theft) and attempt to place responsibility on them. Attacking the victims of crimes is pretty sleazy, even for you.

 

[Dadoalex]

You attack law abiding gun owners, who are victims of crimes (theft) and attempt to place responsibility on them. Attacking the victims of crimes is pretty sleazy, even for you.

!00% of all guns used in crime come from "law abiding" gun owners.
They ARE RESPONSIBLE

But like most cowards refuse to accept their responsibility.

 

[DukeU]

Didn't ask.
How many people are you responsible for killing because of your irresponsible gun storage?
Were those your guns in KC?
Is that why you're so defensive?

Zero.

I am very responsible with my guns and they always remain on my property 100% of the time.

Should they ever disappear, it would be because of someone else's irresponsibility and criminal behavior.

 

[DukeU]

Too complicated for you?
Maybe we should try it in a cartoon?

Evidently you don't know the difference between giving and stealing.

Try to educate yourself on this.

 

[Fang]

Aahhh, the shooters are Biden voters. Of course... smh

 

[Chillicothe]

Funny how you folks place zero responsibility on the thieves. Instead you attack the victims of crimes........You attack law abiding gun owners, who are victims of crimes (theft) and attempt to place responsibility on them. Attacking the victims of crimes

---------------------------------------------------------------


The position offered above....that the "thieves" are blameless, or the 'shooter' using a stolen gun is blameless is a strawman argument.

No one, that I have read.....is advocating that the 'shooters' bear no responsibility. Rather, in my own case, I feel the 'shooter' bears most of the liability, is mostly responsible for whatever harm comes from that stolen gun.

But, having said that, the OOR ain't blameless.

To some degree....and whatever that degree is, is not a subject of this thread, (and is likely best left to legislation or policy wonks).....the OOR must bear some liability for letting his high-lethality tool get out of his control and becomes instrumental in causing harm to society.

Owning a gun must have increased responsibility/liability for the OOR.
If one wishes to possess the benefits a firearm bestows upon the OOR, then one must bear increased responsibility for the harms it bestows upon society.

 

[jknowgood]

I wonder why are there so so so many stolen and illegal guns out there for thugs and criminals to get?

Who are the guns stolen from, and how...?

Is there something we can do to tighten that up...like a task force dedicated to address whatever is causing it? If there isn't one already?

Yeah prosecute violent people instead of letting them out on cashless bail. You stupid mother fucker! That would solve the problem, also public hangings would really deter this shit. Does that address it for you?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Mostly from parked cars. Stop restricting people's ability to carry. So...less government.

???

What I was saying was that people are forced to temporarily store their plinkers in their cars because government has deemed so many places ''gun free zones''

So, less government, or strictly limited government, is the solution (at least insofar as the fact that most stolen guns are stolen from cars) because that problem at its root is ultimately one that is created by government.

That's not even touching on the fact that so many shootings occur in gun free zones, ironically, though predictably.

 

[jknowgood]

"Stolen" from an fool who can't figure out how to secure his guns.
How many people do you think that White guy was responsible for shooting when his gun was "stolen?"

Why does someone break into someone's house to begin with? Liberal policies do that, we eliminate liberal policies. We solve the problem.

 

[jknowgood]

If walgreens fails to protect its products, yes.

You have heard of "Loss Management" have you not?
No?
Not surprised.

I remember a guy sitting on top of the customer service ceiling of the local grocery store. With a shotgun across his lap, we need to return to those times.