Why isn't he in jail?

[Jd seattle]

JanS – exactly why I said I am in favor of reasonable safe storage laws. By reasonsble I mean something not so broad as “it was your gun, it is your fault”. I am ok with a little extra work to make our world safer from guns. We just have to agree on what a “little” is. It sound like we are in agreement on this though?

I also agree doing nothing is not the answer. Thats why I’m trying to re engage in the conversation in friendlier terms. I know we disagree on the second amendment and such. But that shouldn’t stop us from agreeing on a way to keep guns away from children.

Share This

[JayDee]

JD Seattle:

OK, if your CA-approved safe was broken open by a hammer, (which if it cost $400 you might be reluctant to destroy it yourself) then you should not be culpable, as long as you were not the Hammering Man.

I doubt the transporting issue would come up if it was merely going plinking or to a gun range to get lead poisoning while shooting at targets or actually hunting deer/elk. Most of the gun “crimes” (including putting your loaded service revolver under your car seat when going to a 7/11 in reach of children) should be covered.

Share This

[Jd seattle]

I brought up the idea of safe storage laws because of the Marysville high school shooting. I don’t want to debate insurance or registration but I see storage laws doing much more than either of those two could when it comes to children and guns.

Share This

[Jd seattle]

JayDee – now we are getting somewhere.

Share This

[Jd seattle]

JayDee – I brought up the safe issue because my first safe was about 50$ it had a big sticker on the box saying it was CA approved on it. While it was good for keeping honest people out of it, it would offer almost no protection against anything more than a screwdriver. I have since upgraded (size and reliability) because I have many more guns. But I was trying to get across the point that if a thief wants something bad enough they will get it. Very few safes can withstand an attack of someone who is determined to get into it. Short of the ones that cost as much as a nice used car.

Share This

[JoB]

Jd..

if the gun is not registered..

how can anyone prove that at gun that is not in your possession is your gun?

or conversely that a gun someone else says you lent to them is not in fact your gun?

this could bite big time both ways

Share This

[JoB]

and.. you keep concentrating on theft

but it is clear that theft is not the larger problem here

and absolving yourself from the liability of a stolen firearm is as easy as reporting the theft

the larger problem is lies in gun owners giving access to guns to people who can’t legally own them..

Share This

[Jd seattle]

JoB – I agree that a registry would make it easier to track firearms. But too many people (myself included) think that information can be used in nefarious ways. Maybe we are crazy, misguided and paranoid, but that’s the way it is. Let’s not start that debate over. Our government does not have a great track record of being overly honest. I am not pointing to the democrat party only, I think republicans are equally as bad (not individual citizens, just the big politicians)

But, after i594 passes, which I’m sure it most likely will. All pistol sales and transfers will be registerd and long guns will have the background check paper trail. I think a good safe storage law could still do some good without a full blown registry.

Share This

[Jd seattle]

JoB – I’m trying to stay on topic of safe storage. We know we won’t get anywhere on other parts of the gun debate. The other thread was proof of that. I think it would be a shame to let those differences get in the way of coming up with a way to keep guns away from children.

Share This

[JoB]

Jd

let’s take your argument on face value… that your concern about gun registration is that it could be used in “nefarious” ways.

you are concerned about a hypothetical.. a possibility… that the “government” could take your guns away..

but the use of guns by kids in our schools is not hypothetical. kids are gaining access to their parent’s weapons and using them to kill other kids.

Do you really think the fear of a hypothetical threat justifies not taking every possible measure to make guns less available to kids?

or to those who are mentally imbalanced?

or to those whose criminal records should prevent them from having guns?

or to abusing spouses who use them to kill?

or…

You fear that the steps society needs to take to re-instill firearm accountability will lead to your guns being confiscated…

but that fear is preventing us as a society from taking steps to protect the innocent.

Do you really think that your fear, rational or not .. should trump public safety?

i don’t.

to go further with this.. you do realize that you have justified needing guns so that you have the capacity to mount an armed insurrection?

a long time ago i ended up with an FBI file for spending several hours at a kitchen table during a party arguing with one of the national heads of the students for a Democratic Society that the ballot box was a far more effective tool than violence.

i still believe that.

And as an amusing side note.. i saw him speak not so long ago and he has come to believe it too.

Share This

[Jd seattle]

JoB – thank you for your concerns. I see your point. I’m done talking about those topics.

Share This

[JTB]

I’m going to pull something from the top of my head rather than research data, but I’d be happy to focus on the issue of handguns falling into hands of minors apart from theft. It seems to me that represents a large portion of the killings and injuries I read about.

So setting aside whether or not the handgun in question was acquired legally or not, just assuming it is in the possession of an adult, what sort of deterrents might we consider if that adult through some sort of neglect or indifference allows it to be accessed by a child?

I would favor a stiff monetary fine for a first offense if the child is found with a gun but causes no injury to itself or others, or if the firearm otherwise doesn’t discharge. We might assume the handgun was unloaded or a safety mechanism was in use. A misdemeanor charge would occur as well as the fine.

If the handgun is loaded and discharges, the fine would be greater and a greater misdemeanor offense would apply.

If the discharge causes death or injury to the child or another person, a charge of negligent homicide or some degree of assault would apply to the gun owner.

Second occurrences of any of the above would result in confiscation of all firearms, ineligibility to own any firearm in the future and mandatory jail time. I realize this is aggressive, but I think a second offense in this realm indicates the individual has deliberate disregard for the safety of others. It would be similar tp but more reprehensible than a repeat drunk driving offense (which I believe deserves more rigorous penalties than are now in force).

That’s my suggestion for starters.

Share This

[Jd seattle]

JTB – thank you for going into such depth on the penalties. I don’t think those are to agressive at all. I think they are quite fair for such situations. Especially for repeat offenders. As long as we could clearly define “safe” storage in a way that couldn’t be so easily twisted up in court (challenging I know) I think that would be a great framework for the penalties.

Share This

[JoB]

i agree with the penalties.. i proposed something very similar in a discussion with my friend today..

Jd is worried about the definition of storage

i think we first have to answer the question of ownership…

Share This

[Jd seattle]

JoB – ownership in these terms doesn’t matter. If the gun is in your home you are responsible for it.

I’m working on the storage part. I’ll be back with it.

Share This

[JanS]

It’s all a start. But we all know there will be people who will think the laws don’t apply. Look at how many drivers are out there, speeding, taking disabled parking spaces (Tenn. Titans, anyone?), talking on their cell phones while driving, DUI’s. A law won’t stop everything. But…as we keep saying , it’s a start.

I remember, in a previous part of my life when I cleaned houses…I actually, while cleaning, came across some small handguns. The man was elderly, late 80’s, bum leg, blind in one eye (and still drove – ack!). I was getting some sheets out of his hall closet when lo and behold, an old cloth wrapped around 2 small handguns fell out, opened up, and the guns fell onto the floor…from waist height. Scared the crap out of me. I gingerly picked them up, wrapped them up, and made sure they were secure on a shelf and wouldn’t fall again.

Another house had a rifle sitting in a corner in their breezeway off of the garage. I moved it to clean under, and then put it back. Loaded? I had no idea. Not acceptable as far as I’m concerned.And these were smart people ! Obviously, some people think that’s OK :(

Share This

[HMC Rich]

What a tragedy. There are possibly some other variables at play here. If I read articles correctly, they lived on the Tulalip reservation land. They may not be bound by certain laws which the state may pass. In years past when I was a resident over near the Spokane Reservation, I remember when Native Americans could go hunting whenever they wanted on their lands. I don’t know what the laws are and even if what the State would pass would be applicable to residents of Native Lands.

I do believe certain safeguards need to be implemented but some of them suggested are already sending alarms to my way of thinking. Politically, I am NOT in favor of public access to owners or non owners of firearms. Just seeing the abuse from groups regarding political groups and donors leads me to be against public access to their names and addresses.

Share This

[TanDL]

I don’t see how you could possibly enforce any sort of storage law without unreasonable searches of homes. Unless, maybe you are thinking of storage at a publicly guarded locker facility outside the home? The state could require gun owners to buy all sorts of lockers, safes, trigger guards, etc., but how can you make someone actually use them in their own home after purchase? Yes, you could cite them after the fact… after their guns have been used in the commission of a crime or tragedy, but I don’t see that as much help, once the crime or tragedy has happened and someone has been injured or killed. Not sure what a good answer would be here in terms of storage.

Share This

[JTB]

I don’t believe it is necessary to get into the particulars of safe storage beyond specifying that firearms must be stored in a manner which prevents an unauthorized person from being able to use them. That might include everything from locked gun safes to the finger print technology which gun advocates attacked in LA not long ago. I agree you can’t hold someone accountable if a gun safe is stolen. But leaving a firearm unsecured so someone can take it even without your permission doesn’t cut it. What I think is necessary if we really want to shift the culture toward accountability for management of lethal firearm is to have clear consequences for mismanagement.

I’m fine with a registry being available only to law enforcement agencies.

Share This

[JoB]

HMCRich..

sadly.. the laws on firearm storage and use by minors are as lax off the reservation as they are on.

the difference is that the Tualip reservation has recognized they have a problem they need to solve and are in the process of doing so…

they don’t need to wait for the rest of the state of Washington to fall in line.

Share This

[JoB]

there will always be criminals

the trouble is that what once was considered criminal behavior with guns has spilled over into mainstream behavior.

Share This

[TanDL]

The other thing I wonder is this… Does it make sense to jail a father who just lost his son due to allowing the son have access to guns? Clearly the father thought the son was responsible enough to handle guns, being taught to hunt responsibly and all. The father is devastated. Would our position be that we would be making an example of him by incarceration after the fact? I’m not sure doing any more to him would be reasonable at this point as the pain of losing his beloved son must be excruciating and will haunt him the rest of his life. There must be a better way than always thinking punitive punishments. If those worked, it seems like we would have less folks in jail than the thousands we keep locking up each year for various crimes. I don’t know what the better way is… but we keep locking people up and people keep breaking the law. Clearly something isn’t working here.

Maybe we need to start addressing the gun culture in our society. Every day kids get on their computers and see on TV that the way to solve problems is with guns and explosives. How many computer games feature good guys blasting away at the bad guys with guns? How many shows on TV feature guns, darn near every night. Guns make people feel powerful and when a kid feels powerless in any situation, where do they take their cues from?

Anyhow, just my frustrated $.02 worth in trying to figure out how to stop or at least slow this tragic mess down in our society. How long before the next set of shootings? Probably not that long from now…..

Share This

[JTB]

TanDL, I would imagine that final sentencing would reflect the overall circumstances of the case. There is a credible debate about the purpose of laws regarding punishment and deterrence. I think deterrence is the objective here, but that requires a general sense on the part of gun owners that punishment is certain or at least very likely.

Share This

[wakeflood]

Man, if people are trying to sort out the details of deterrence – which requires the offender to be thinking rationally and making functional decisions – when we’ve got hundreds of millions of firearms on the streets, many of them in the hands of people who have the capacity to be both desperate and not making good decisions at the drop of a hat – then we are going to watch scenes like Marysville and Sandy Hook and Chicago unfold ANOTHER thousand times.

MANY, maybe MOST of these people are not obviously, nor clinically diseased to the point where they would logically be denied a weapon NOR deterred by any law once they got it. THIS is THE PROBLEM TO SOLVE. And we gloss over it like it’s a side issue at best. It is THE ISSUE.

Rational deterrence is a fine debate to have when we’re not dealing with an epidemic, which we are.

Share This

[wakeflood]

And deterrence doesn’t work with the death penalty anyway, why would it work in this scenario?

Nobody who’s rational ever couches it in those terms, unless their uninformed and have an agenda. It’s 100% penal.

I suspect the mere specter of deterrence does nothing more than give the offender a reason to be more stealthy, wily, prepared and consequently more deadly to everyone once they finally go off.

Share This

[Author]

Posts