(02-18-2019 05:11 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 04:57 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 12:49 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 11:39 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 11:15 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  I agree in this case he should have lost the gun. But what if he said he didn't have it anymore?

Going through it a little further - what if he already had the gun and then had the conviction which would prevent him from getting a gun. Would they take the gun away? Or is he grandfathered in?

Constitutional rights exist without due process. Someone convicted later has received due process and lost his rights. There should be a means to 'store' them, but they have received due process.

He could lie certainly... just like any other criminal... and they could do a search etc etc etc and if they don't find it, they've at least tried. Nothing is 100%. I just want our efforts to reduce gun crimes to focus on criminals rather than turning law abiding citizens INTO criminals.

If we banned guns, how many otherwise law abiding citizens do you think would 'lie' and keep their guns? I'm betting tens of millions. Some violently

I certainly fully support better enforcement of existing gun laws - I can't imagine anyone would argue that point.
However, that does not negate the need for some additional regulation (and effective enforcement of that as well).

For example - this article from the Tennessean/Commercial Appeal/whatever you want to call the hot mess Gannett conglomerate:
https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/n...871666002/

In case you are locked out of it, the gist:

Nashville saw a 70 percent increase in firearms stolen from vehicles between 2016 and 2018, when there were 659 reported thefts of one or more guns from cars and trucks, according to Metro police.

Statewide, there was an 85 percent increase in guns stolen from cars and trucks in a two-year period from 2016 to 2017, according to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.

******

In 2013, the Tennessee legislature approved what is called the "guns in trunks" law, which made it legal for valid permit holders to keep handguns in cars and trucks parked in public and at private employer-owned parking lots.

In 2014, lawmakers went further, enacting a law that allows legal gun owners to keep loaded handguns, shotguns and rifles in their cars without a state handgun carry permit.

Before the 2014 measure, only those with state-issued handgun carry permits could legally keep loaded firearms in vehicles. Owners of long guns, including hunting rifles, who don't need a permit to carry those firearms in their vehicles, were not allowed to keep them loaded before the 2014 law.

In December, Memphis Police Director Mike Rallings urged state lawmakers to act, saying the gun laws have led to the "unintended consequence" of an increase in weapons left in cars by their owners, then stolen — and a corresponding spike in violent crime. Rallings said he would like the laws repealed.

Firearm thefts from vehicles in Memphis have increased by 256 percent since 2013, according to the city's police.


Why should there not be some kind of punishment for people who are being irresponsible with their guns, leading to them being stolen and/or crimes being committed with them?
That in no way means that the criminals themselves should not be fully punished for both the theft AND any crimes committed.

I let my stuff get stolen all the time. It's a hobby of mine.

I take a bunch of stuff and put it in a pile out in the middle of East Gate Shopping Center's parking lot.

I go back the next day to see how much stuff I lost.

It's a blast.



Seriously, we're talking about a law that penalizes the victim.

Somebody breaks into my car (which is illegal) and steals a weapon (which is illegal) which I have a legal right to carry and I'm the one who gets charged with a crime.

Seriously? That's OK with you?


Let's say I'm out running errands. One of those includes stopping by the post office. It's a federal crime to carry a weapon into a post office so I leave it in the car.

Somebody breaks in to my car. I'm guilty of a crime?

OK, now that somebody stole my gun I head home to pick up one of my other guns. I continue my errands. Next stop -- the bank.

It's a crime to carry a weapon into a bank so I leave it in the car.

This time somebody steals my car with the gun still inside. Again, I'm guilty of a crime?


By the TN law that is cited, vehicles are now considered an extension of your home. I have the legal right to own and possess a weapon in my home and in my care.

I also have the reasonable expectation to not have crimes committed against me.

To criminalize the law-abiding citizen is an attempt to circumvent the constitution.

You also as a gun owner have the reasonable responsibility to protect your weapon from being stolen. Again, an unlocked car and/or leaving a gun laying out in plain sight is not being responsible.

Again, IMO, if you have to leave your gun in your car and you hide it or lock it in a glove compartment/place it in the console, AND you lock your vehicle, you made a reasonable effort to protect it.

Thanks.

I think a reasonable expectation is for people to not steal from me in the first place.

So let's say I locked it in the glove compartment. Somebody stole the car. I made a reasonable effort to protect it.

But let's say I hid it under the seat because the glove compartment is too small. Somebody steals my car. Did I make a reasonable effort to protect it?

Short of me leaving a weapon in plain sight with the windows rolled down, why would I be guilty of any crime when somebody steals my property?

(02-18-2019 04:29 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 04:00 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 03:45 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 03:18 PM)uofmcamaro Wrote:  This argument that the gun owner should be punished if their gun is stolen and used in a crime kinda sounds like victim shaming, no? “Had she not been wearing that short dress in public...”

Apples and oranges. Last I checked, a short dress was not a lethal weapon.

Irresponsible gun owners who leave their guns vulnerable to theft like this are directly contributing to the gun violence problems that they claim they need their guns for in the first place. There should be some accountability, IN ADDITION to holding the criminals accountable as well. With the huge uptick in thefts in TN alone, it's cause for alarm.

I hate to sound like a broken record but.......stats?

I'm finding stats in regards to homes AND cars, not just cars, like bobdizole.
However, are we really being that naive to assume that some of the guns that are stolen by CRIMINALS will not be used in.......crimes?

This is even from a right-leaning publication:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201...ed-in-vio/

Police say stolen and illegal guns are at the root of violence across the country.

In San Francisco, the gun used to kill Kathryn Steinle, who was fatally shot in July as she walked with her father along a scenic pier, was stolen. Chicago has already seized nearly 4,700 guns - nearly all of them stolen - this year. Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said that’s seven times more guns seized than New York City, and three times the number in Los Angeles.

“They’re the engine of violence in Chicago,” Guglielmi said. “These are guns that are on the streets used to fuel the violence in Chicago.”

Another, more left than the Washington Times:
https://www.thetrace.org/features/stolen...e-america/

A yearlong investigation by The Trace and more than a dozen NBC TV stations identified more than 23,000 stolen firearms recovered by police between 2010 and 2016 — the vast majority connected with crimes. That tally, based on an analysis of police records from hundreds of jurisdictions, includes more than 1,500 carjackings and kidnappings, armed robberies at stores and banks, sexual assaults and murders, and other violent acts committed in cities from coast to coast.

“The impact of gun theft is quite clear,” said Frank Occhipinti, deputy chief of the firearms operations division for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. “It is devastating our communities.”

So in other words you have no facts to back up your "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!!!!" claim about firearms left in cars.

Par for the course with hoplophobes in general and you in particular.

If we gun rights proponents give in on this there will be little to any statistical improvement and the next thing we know you'll be wanting to charge people who have guns stolen from their home. Don;t try to say it will not happen because it's happened every other time we've given an inch on our gun rights.

Enforce the damned laws already on the books before you try to pass new ones, and have some damned statistical proof it's going to make a significant difference before you try to restrict my damned rights any more. I've given up as much as I am currently prepared to give up, and I am most assuredly not alone.

(02-18-2019 02:18 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 02:13 PM)Crebman Wrote:  What if the car is locked?

Again, if a thief steals a car and hits someone with it, should the victim be punished because their car was stolen? What makes this different than them stealing a gun?

If the car is locked & the gun is out of plain sight (i.e. glove compartment/console), I don't think the owner should be punished. IMO that's a (legal in TN) reasonable expectation of responsibility if you're not going to keep your gun on your person.

Personally, I think it's ridiculous that the laws have been relaxed to allow guns to be left in cars, but it is what it is. If that's legal, then there needs to some kind of reasonable expectation of responsibility with it - leaving your car unlocked with a gun in it is NOT responsible by any stretch of the imagination.

Are you aware that negligence with a firearm is already a crime? All you have to do is convince a majority of your jury (or even a single judge) that 'whatever' this person did or did not do was negligent and you have a crime. Prove that it was contributory to damages and you have a civil suit.

My point is that the laws already exist.... and your concern about 'relaxing' laws is really just addressing the very real situation where someone who is legally allowed to carry ends up somewhere where carry is not allowed. What is he supposed to do? Go home (which may be hours or even days away) to store it so that he can legally cash a check or watch a high school football game? That's not the only situation, just a very real one that 'relaxing' the law addresses.

I keep putting 'relaxed' in quotes because I don't agree that laws on guns have relaxed anywhere or in any regard... but I'm accepting that certain aspects to the right to carry have been specified in order to allow SOME restrictions on carry. You're allowed to keep a gun in your car because it might be a better/safer option than carrying into a bank or your sisters home with little children or maybe even your own home.