This is for my English **Final** paper. Let me know what you think, I'm looking for all opinions (opposing and agreeing), any websites...just let me know! The question is: Should gun owners be held liable for accidents involving children and firearms?
2007-05-01 19:05:37 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
This is for my English **Final** paper. Let me know what you think, I'm looking for all opinions (opposing and agreeing), any websites...just let me know! The question is: Should gun owners be held liable for accidents involving children and firearms?
(Accidents being that someone got injured, to clarify)
2007-05-01 19:29:33 · update #1
It should depend on the situation! If the gunowner took reasonable measures to secure his weapons (locked gun cabinet, keys on his/her person at all times), and a child STILL managed to get ahold of the weapon, then NO, the gunowner should not be held liable!
HOWEVER...
If it could be proven that the gunowner was negligent in some way, (like leaving a loaded gun unattended and unlocked), then YES the gunowner should be held liable.
Use the same logic we use for cars! If I leave my car unlocked, with the keys in the ignition ... and some kids "borrow" that car and wreck it, causing property damage and personal injury. I am liable for "failing to properly secure" my car.
On the other hand, If I leave my car in a lot, locked, with the keys in my possession, and it is stolen and used to create mayhem, I am somewhat (but not completely) protected through my use of "due care."
The devil is in the details! If the gunowner could be reasonably expected to take steps to secure his firearms that he did not, then they are (or should be) held liable. If the gunowner took all "reasonable and customary" steps to secure those firearms ... and an accident STILL occured ... I'm sorry, but I would find it hard to hold the gunowner liable!
2007-05-01 19:48:37 · answer #1 · answered by ornery and mean 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES! if your responsible for what your dog does then yes you should definitely be held responsible for what your gun does.
There are so many way's that you can prevent children from having an accident with a firearm. There are even government funded programs that offer free gun locks, all you have to do is call and they will send you all the stuff to keep your firearms safe from children. The best safety plan is to not have guns in the house with children, but if for some reason you feel that you need to have one you should most definitely be responsible for it.
2007-05-02 02:12:49 · answer #2 · answered by babydragonspawn 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The key word in your question is "accident". What is the premise for this statement? Is the question implying that the gun owner was negligible in the storage of their fire arm and that it was easily accessible to children? Does it imply that the children were not educated on the danger of fire arms and to respect them?
If the fire arm was stored properly and the children were educated on the safety of that fire arm and yet they still access it and an "accident" results then I do not believe the owner should be held liable. There truly are accidents that occur out there. Sometimes there is no appropriate party to place responsibility and blame on. My father was LAPD for 20 years and we always had I fire arm in our home. From the time I was 6 I knew where it was and I was educated accordingly. I was allowed to, under supervision and with the fire arm unloaded of course, hold the fire Arm and see how it worked. It took the mystery of it right out of me and I never had the desire to seek it out.
On the other side of the issue, those that are careless with their fire arms should be held accountable for actions resulting in the use of that fire arm.
2007-05-02 02:24:21 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. Perfect 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I love firearms and take pride in being a gun owner. I also am a new father so this has been taken vary seriously in my house.If you own a firearm you should be expect that if that gun is used in to injure or to take a life regardless of the circumstances you are responsible. In this case if you have a child or children in your house then you are obligated to secure that weapon at all times. The worst part is for the ones that don't when you buy a gun you are given a lock free of charge.
2007-05-02 02:14:37 · answer #4 · answered by kartman 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am not sure of the laws, but I say guns laws and children should be the same as if your child drinks some toxin they found under the sink.
Unless the child broke the glass to a cabinet to get to the gun though. I mean... It really depends because it could be locked up but if the kid is being a moron and intentionally breaks his/her way into the safe keep then that was by choice.
I never heard of a young ignorant child hurting themselves on a properly stored gun, and same with properly stored chemicals.
2007-05-02 02:10:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Most of us feel the need to blame SOMEone. This applies whether the owner is at fault or even within miles of the gun.
2007-05-02 02:11:48 · answer #6 · answered by syrious 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They already are.
Should car owners be held liable for injuries caused by their stolen cars?
2007-05-02 19:01:04 · answer #7 · answered by RockHunter 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
depends on the situation. its all about negligence, was the gun owner negligent? did they show proper care and try to keep the children safe? if so and the kids did it anyway, they are not liable.
2007-05-02 02:09:39 · answer #8 · answered by J G 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Easier said than done...of course the obvious is yes to punish..but isn't it punishment enough that a loved one is injured or killed.
Or why should someone be punished for maliciousness when they attempted to secure their weapons and the attempt was breached.
2007-05-02 02:16:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Should you be held liable for paper cuts or staple punctures your professor receives...
2007-05-02 02:08:56 · answer #10 · answered by ★Greed★ 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋