Do you support the passage of a new law, which would mandate the use of "trigger locks" and hold gun owners criminally responsible if their gun is used in a crime, even if the gun is stolen? Yes.....or....No
2007-12-09 13:07:45 · 19 answers · asked by dca2003311@yahoo.com 7 in Sports ➔ Outdoor Recreation ➔ Hunting
NO!!
And just a note here...
A firearm that has a lock on it and (Or) is locked away is useless when needed....
I keep mine loaded and ready for service!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Minutemen didn't ever say,"Hold the British off for a little while so I can get my gun out of the freaking vault."
2007-12-09 17:52:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO! I do however feel responsible gun owners would already either have their firearms in a safe or gunvault, or they would already have trigger locks on them.
Regardless of that, if the gun is stolen, the person using it is alone in the the responsibility. A trigger lock only keeps an honest man honest, a criminal mind already knows how to get a trigger lock off before he even steals the pistol.
2007-12-09 13:15:02 · answer #2 · answered by boker_magnum 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The idea that a trigger lock, will keep someone from using the gun, is a crock of crap.
any gun that has a trigger lock on it can be altered so as to remove the lock, without hurting the operation of the gun. the only people that can't figure this out, is the idiots, that make the laws
2007-12-09 13:39:36 · answer #3 · answered by Roger W 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Heck no!! How would they ever be able to pass a law like that especially on trigger locks and how would they ever enforce such a "dumb" law. How about if someone steals my truck and its used in a crime? Should i be held responsible? What am i supposed to do when some hood breaks into my home ? Tell him to wait while i unlock my gun? Who wrote this legislation? IS it on the table at the state or federal level. Geez they just wont quit will they!
2007-12-09 13:15:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your question sounds like your against law abiding citizens to own firearms. No I would not support this legislation. If you look there are already laws on the books that make it a crime to leave a firearm where a child or unauthorized adult can gain access to it. Every firearm made today comes with a lock already.
Even if the firearm is stolen thats like putting someone in prision for thier car being stolen and gets invloved in a crash.
2007-12-10 03:34:24 · answer #5 · answered by corp20022 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is already a law in Canada about using trigger locks, but the second part is hazy. There should be some light penalty if it is stolen but you don't report it and it is used in a crime because that is just a dumb thing to do. If you do report it stolen, than no, that makes no sense at all.
So, no, the only part that can apply to me, I disagree with.
2007-12-09 13:14:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Little by little. Been going on for years. I remember when in Jr. high I wanted to write an essay on how hunters and fishermen are the true conversationalists. Wasn't Theodore Roosevelt and avid hunter yet he started the national park system? Don't the fees paid by hunters go to maintaining the outback and game herds? Anyway the teacher one Mrs. Jenkins told me "hunting is cruel and barbaric, it's no longer necessary in a civilized society...write about something else". So I got an incomplete, thought about dumping a hand full of dirt in her gas tank too. There's no way one single case will end up getting hunting outlawed, it has to be done incrementally. You start the process early in the public education process. You make all hunters out to be fat, dumb bigoted redneck beer swilling wife beaters. You blame gun ownership on everything from high crime rates to the decline of rare and endangered species due to lead poisoning from spent bullets. Anti hunting groups and the gun grabbers are using the propaganda process and they've been doing it a long, long time.
2016-05-22 09:42:59 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, well for handguns, maybe, but for rifles and shotguns, the trigger lock mechanisms can be removed with a hack saw, and that is bull crap if say somebody breaks into your house steals all your crap, incluing your gun, then goes and commits another crime, leaves the gun with your prints all over it, then your screwed, I dont think that law would work, but it might make people be more responsible with their gun storage and use
2007-12-09 13:16:55 · answer #8 · answered by take it or leave it 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I can't agree.......If someone breaks in my home, and manages to cut my vault open without burning down the house, steals a gun, and uses it in a crime......the courts aren't going to do anything with him anyway....It happened to me....the window was broken, the entry was made, and the vault was impenetrable. He saw three long guns in the den, and tripped the motion detector, grabbed the guns, and left.....About two weeks later, he was apprehended, but without the guns. He was kind enough to leave his fingerprints behind, and he was a juvenile, already in the system......Court date was set, and I called to verify the courtroom location, only to find he had plead guilty to forced entry, and agreed to pay restitution for the guns.....I did get the money.......He got two weeks in juvenile detention, and one years probation..........Under this new law, had he committed a crime, I probably would have gotten seven years.......
2007-12-09 16:20:47 · answer #9 · answered by Pullet Surprise 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Only if the police and politicians can be held liable for preventing the theft of arms. Better yet, for failure to prevent crime. Or even better, be held responsible for knowing where criminal activity and criminals exist but fail to remove them from society, then maybe we could hold the victims of theft responsible for the actions of the thieves.
John
2007-12-09 15:51:40 · answer #10 · answered by lorangj 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋