July 2, 201412 yr Author Georgia House Bill 60, also known as the "Safe Carry Protection Act of 2014", (or the "guns everywhere bill"... depending on what side of the debate you are on), now apparently now allows Georgians with concealed carry permits to carry in some bars, churches, school zones, government buildings and designated parts of airports. Looks like one person got that confused with being able to pull a gun on someone and ask to see their permit.
July 2, 201412 yr First day of new gun law leads to arrest » Top News » Valdosta Daily Times [ATTACH=CONFIG]45622[/ATTACH] :no: Sometimes, unfortunately, you just can't fix stupid. I'm all about the freedom to pack your side arm of choice on your person, but in my opinion this guy just proved he CAN'T do so responsibly and his ability to do so should be taken away.
July 2, 201412 yr Author :no: Sometimes, unfortunately, you just can't fix stupid. I'm all about the freedom to pack your side arm of choice on your person, but in my opinion this guy just proved he CAN'T do so responsibly and his ability to do so should be taken away. That guy should probably have a lot of things taken away. Friend of mine in law school had a really interesting idea for gun ownership. Strict(er) liability if you were the person who sold a gun to someone that was in your possession before being used in a crime and/or for who you sold it to. Your the dealer/dealership that sold a gun to the guy in Colorado who shot up the Batman premiere? Hope you've got insurance (which you'd be required to have). You are the Newtown, Conn. parent whose son stole your gun and used it to shoot up a school? Shouldn't have let your mentally ill son know where it was. Background checks would probably get a little stricter and parties more nervous if there were more liability if it's your butt on the line when you are the last person in the chain of title and something bad ends up happening. I'm not really saying I agree or disagree with it, and we didn't discuss it in great detail, but I thought it was a decent enough idea to at least discuss. I'm really not sure how I feel about it to be honest. I think it'd have some merits, but I'm sure there are plenty of consequences that would result that I haven't really thought of either.
July 2, 201412 yr That guy should probably have a lot of things taken away. Friend of mine in law school had a really interesting idea for gun ownership. Strict(er) liability if you were the person who sold a gun to someone that was in your possession before being used in a crime and/or for who you sold it to. Your the dealer/dealership that sold a gun to the guy in Colorado who shot up the Batman premiere? Hope you've got insurance (which you'd be required to have). You are the Newtown, Conn. parent whose son stole your gun and used it to shoot up a school? Shouldn't have let your mentally ill son know where it was. Background checks would probably get a little stricter and parties more nervous if there were more liability if it's your butt on the line when you are the last person in the chain of title and something bad ends up happening. I'm not really saying I agree or disagree with it, and we didn't discuss it in great detail, but I thought it was a decent enough idea to at least discuss. I'm really not sure how I feel about it to be honest. I think it'd have some merits, but I'm sure there are plenty of consequences that would result that I haven't really thought of either. How about suing people that sell cars to drunk drivers or sell cameras to perverts too! I have no problem with strict background checks and wish some things were added to the list of things that stop you from owning a firearm. But suing someone who legally sells a gun because the next guy does something stupid is way over the line in my opinion.
July 2, 201412 yr In the Newtown case you can sue her if you want, but he killed her to steal her guns...so I don't know if that would do any good
July 3, 201412 yr Author How about suing people that sell cars to drunk drivers or sell cameras to perverts too! I have no problem with strict background checks and wish some things were added to the list of things that stop you from owning a firearm. But suing someone who legally sells a gun because the next guy does something stupid is way over the line in my opinion. The point with selling was that the employers themselves would add to their own background checks (and probably screen some of the things you'd like to add to them) because they'd be so afraid of being sued and/or having their insurance rates go up. It's the same principle of someone suing the insurance company that gave insurance to the guy with 7 DUI's. I'm not saying I completely agreed or disagreed with the guy's point, but it if you're wishing that some things would be added to background checks because they are strong indicators that someone who could otherwise own a gun shouldn't have one, then those are probably the kinds of things that gun dealers would add if that kind of measure was in place.
July 3, 201412 yr Author In the Newtown case you can sue her if you want, but he killed her to steal her guns...so I don't know if that would do any good Not really an area of law I deal with a lot, but I'd imagine you might be able to take a lot of money from her estate, life insurance policies, etc.
July 3, 201412 yr Not really an area of law I deal with a lot, but I'd imagine you might be able to take a lot of money from her estate, life insurance policies, etc. I don't think you'd be too successful being that she was killed to obtain the guns. It isn't like she gave them to him.
July 3, 201412 yr Author I don't think you'd be too successful being that she was killed to obtain the guns. It isn't like she gave them to him. Didn't realize he'd killed her at home first. Agree with you on that one unless it was maybe some type of deal where it'd be proven that they didn't keep the gun away from him like they should have.
July 3, 201412 yr The point with selling was that the employers themselves would add to their own background checks (and probably screen some of the things you'd like to add to them) because they'd be so afraid of being sued and/or having their insurance rates go up. It's the same principle of someone suing the insurance company that gave insurance to the guy with 7 DUI's. I'm not saying I completely agreed or disagreed with the guy's point, but it if you're wishing that some things would be added to background checks because they are strong indicators that someone who could otherwise own a gun shouldn't have one, then those are probably the kinds of things that gun dealers would add if that kind of measure was in place. Gun Dealers don't have access to do extra background checks beyond what the FBI/NICS system does. I can't imagine the 4th Amendment arguments if Walmart for example was able to access medical records to check for mental issues before selling a gun to a customer. Additional checks will ONLY work if they are part of the current NICS system, that is who the onus to improve and expand checks lie, not with local retailers.
July 4, 201412 yr Author Gun Dealers don't have access to do extra background checks beyond what the FBI/NICS system does. I can't imagine the 4th Amendment arguments if Walmart for example was able to access medical records to check for mental issues before selling a gun to a customer. Additional checks will ONLY work if they are part of the current NICS system, that is who the onus to improve and expand checks lie, not with local retailers. Why has the NICS system not been expanded to include gun dealers, even if it's only access to limited sets of information (like who is/isn't something as general as 'flagged')? I ask because I'm genuinely curious and isn't really something that I'm very familiar with.
July 4, 201412 yr That guy should probably have a lot of things taken away. Friend of mine in law school had a really interesting idea for gun ownership. Strict(er) liability if you were the person who sold a gun to someone that was in your possession before being used in a crime and/or for who you sold it to. Your the dealer/dealership that sold a gun to the guy in Colorado who shot up the Batman premiere? Hope you've got insurance (which you'd be required to have). You are the Newtown, Conn. parent whose son stole your gun and used it to shoot up a school? Shouldn't have let your mentally ill son know where it was. Background checks would probably get a little stricter and parties more nervous if there were more liability if it's your butt on the line when you are the last person in the chain of title and something bad ends up happening. I'm not really saying I agree or disagree with it, and we didn't discuss it in great detail, but I thought it was a decent enough idea to at least discuss. I'm really not sure how I feel about it to be honest. I think it'd have some merits, but I'm sure there are plenty of consequences that would result that I haven't really thought of either. Pure lunacy.
July 4, 201412 yr That guy should probably have a lot of things taken away. Friend of mine in law school had a really interesting idea for gun ownership. Strict(er) liability if you were the person who sold a gun to someone that was in your possession before being used in a crime and/or for who you sold it to. Your the dealer/dealership that sold a gun to the guy in Colorado who shot up the Batman premiere? Hope you've got insurance (which you'd be required to have). You are the Newtown, Conn. parent whose son stole your gun and used it to shoot up a school? Shouldn't have let your mentally ill son know where it was. Background checks would probably get a little stricter and parties more nervous if there were more liability if it's your butt on the line when you are the last person in the chain of title and something bad ends up happening. I'm not really saying I agree or disagree with it, and we didn't discuss it in great detail, but I thought it was a decent enough idea to at least discuss. I'm really not sure how I feel about it to be honest. I think it'd have some merits, but I'm sure there are plenty of consequences that would result that I haven't really thought of either. Pure lunacy.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.