A Rant on Irresponsible Gun Ownership

[Deserteagle]

You don't know how to determine how a person is deemed sane enough to buy a gun or not but you think it may be easier to determine who is to procreate or have that ability removed?

This ought to be interesting. By the way, I volunteer to make that decision! :):)

KK

Well that solves that. A panel composed of you and me shall make the decisions lol. Works for me!

[BuddhaKat]

What's lacking is the fact that no education is required before anyone can own a gun. I have always believed that I have an obligation to be a responsible gun owner/user, whether I carry in public or not. The NRA has a great deal of information about proper gun use and safety, but they don't get into much about the law and legal responsibility. It's a shame.

It's hard to decide what's proper in the 2nd amendment debate as there are legitimate points on both sides. More than 200 years have passed since our Constitution was signed and there could be an argument that our forefathers could never have imagined the type of guns that we have today. I suspect they wouldn't change their minds since their intent of the 2nd amendment was to guard against a tyrannical government. It's more than just the differences between their time of muskets and our time of fully automatic machine guns. Society was different back then as well. Times were harder and parents, as well as families, were closer to their children. Nowadays, parents leave the raising of their children to the TV and the school, or even worse, Facebook and Twitter. Our forefathers could never have imagined the social structure we have today. I can't help but wonder what they would have come up with if they could have seen into the future.

[gunsrgr8]

No education is required to use 1st amendment either and we got OWS. With the associated crimes and political demands. There must be some common sense restrictions, maybe a 4 hour class and permit before exercising their 1st am.

[gunsrgr8]

Don't forget a background check with fingerprints.

[dojoman]

Here comes the finger pointing and let's strap down on whom gets guns and who doesn't.
The simple point here is that a person robbed another persons guns. She admitted to taken them so charges should be pressed for Breaking and Entery,as well as robbery. And depending on state laws there could me more for guns being involved. Plan and simple. Anyone with common sence knows that no matter how "secure" your guns are......to someone with enough knowledge and Time....they can get to them, accept that fact. A Safe, even if its bolted to the hardest substance known to man, will only slow a robber down. If you want your gun to be 100% safe until you die...then the answer is one of two....A) don't own one or B) keep it on your body.
As far as who can and can not own guns.....the Feds and State have those mandates. You nor I can assume someone is not responsable because of XYZ. (keep in mind the word reasonable).
The problem is Everyone thinks their definition of Reasonable Security or Safe Keeping are the Word of Law. Sorry to tell you this but you are not correct or incorrect. Maybe to me, where I live, having a simple pillow over it is fine, while other areas you feel the need for a Bomb proof safe is the minimum needed. The point is, its not for us to judge if he had it Secured enough. He already lost out on his investment and apparently has bigger problems, like his family.

[NCIC105]

If we take the 2nd to the letter of the law then it should not be infringed on. If an idiot points a weapon at me he just bought his one way ticket.....I grew up in a world where a Father taught his sons gun safety. It is a shame that Fathers are not around to do this (abandoning their children). If continue to eliminate our rights we soon will not have any left. Yes this argument is decades old and will most likely go on for years.

[NCIC105]

It sounds very plausible to me living in SC. This place is full of seemingly inbred no brain idiots KK

That is the great thing about America you can live where you want!

Trust me every state has this same issue.

[sheepdogjmanz]

"The story itself is quite plausible it’s the way the OP relates it. I’ve worked as a security guard and in the medical field. What do those two fields have in common you ask? In both you learn how to write reports. The OP doesn’t relate the story the way a cop would (I’ve read quite a few police reports) and that trips my BS alarms" Keyboard Thug

Keyboard Thug, feel free to come hang out with me at work one day and I'll show you what I do is "BS." Your absolutely right the post is vague because I didn't copy and paste my offense report. Your also correct, your expeince as a security guard and in the medical field qualifies you tell whether or not my post is "BS" because it doesn't relate. Define relate. Any way, I have better things to do than humor a "KeyBoard Thug."

To all other productive people on here worth converstaing with. I know there could never be requirements to "qualify" for 2nd amendment rights. It takes away from the importance of the law, and what it stands for. Unfortunatly we have to deal with the bad, that comes with the good. Just my two cents.

[BC1]

Let's all not lose sight of the fact that that second amendment, as any law, is open to interpretation. At this time the second allows for restrictions as long as they don't constitute a complete ban. Requiring a permit or education before issueing a permit, or denial to criminals or the insane falls within the second as defined in the Heller and McDonald decisions. We can only hope the hiugh court retains it's GOP majority or this right will be interpreted much differently.

I don't personally see anything obtuse about the original post. I'd rather see constructive discussion on the content of the post, not others calling the poster BS.